From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,be23df8e7e275d73 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-02 07:18:52 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!193.251.151.101!opentransit.net!proxad.net!feeder2-1.proxad.net!nnrp6.proxad.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "nicolas" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <3B5DCE74.C12AA2D8@earthlink.net> <1Zu77.187$EF5.315498@nnrp1.proxad.net> <9jp5eo$e2b$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <9jrdl3$mh2$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <%hb87.917$%w2.3730577@nnrp3.proxad.net> <9jrt62$38t$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B619A6D.5DD6E782@home.com> <3B6636BA.96FD8348@home.com> <9kb3ub$hdo$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <3B695521.54BBF4D3@nbi.dk> Subject: Re: Proving Correctness (was Java Portability) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 14:18:52 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.101.131.241 X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net X-Trace: nnrp6.proxad.net 996761932 195.101.131.241 (Thu, 02 Aug 2001 16:18:52 CEST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 16:18:52 CEST Organization: Guest of ProXad - France Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11082 Date: 2001-08-02T14:18:52+00:00 List-Id: "Jacob Sparre Andersen" a �crit dans le message news: 3B695521.54BBF4D3@nbi.dk... > Nicolas: > > > Everybody knows what popular languages compilers provide > > I am not sure I do, but I will try to make a list and guess > which things you consider important. I work on Digital Unix > and Linux systems. Well I certainly exagerated. What I meant actually is that Windows and Mac are likely to be the only platforms where one can really figure out, how high are the requirements of interactivity and ease of use for software users. You don't really have a high level user interface for embedded systems. HP Sun Irix and others unixes are extremely rare for workstations Linux is still not really ready for a PC you can buy in a supermarket. For example I think that RH 7.1 is a regression regarding RH 7.0 (XConfigurator or Linuxconf are likely to ruin your system without any warning) Talking about XConfigurator, any method to configure your screen (colors, resolution etc ...) under Linux is totally unacceptable for a Mac or Windows user. In fact what you need is not so complicated to define. Choose some small application where graphical user interface is important. Try to develop it a C/C++ version Try to develop a Java version Try to develop an Ada version Anything you have to look for in Ada, and you don't have to look for in Java or C is definitely something which must be corrected. > * Ada - the standard libraries and some vendor > dependent stuff (GNAT.*) > > * Basic - don't know > * C - the standard libraries > * C++ - the standard libraries > * COBOL - don't know > * Fortran - the standard libraries > * Java - don't know > * Borland Pascal - integrated GUI builder and DB builder, > no _standard_ libraries Let 's be honest, real competition is with C, C++ and Java Despite its qualities, Ada has a lot of problem to be accepted in front of those languages Things are likely to be far worse in front of C# if it does what it says.