Re: AuroraUX Combines SunOS with Ada

[Ivan Levashew <octagram@bluebottle.com>]

anon wrote:
> 
> Why 100% Ada. A 100% Ada could prove the strengths of Ada and its 
> weaknesses.

So you insist on Ada virtual machine?

> Then the weaknesses could be fixed in the next specs.

Some weaknesses are indeniable blockers.

> But without 100% Ada some of those weaknesses will be passed to the next 
> specification and beyond.

That's OK. Every weakness is often strength from another side. There is
no silver bullet.

Every strength can be roughly classified as either synthesis or analysis
strength. The reality is so that S and A ones are mutually exclusive.
You can't catch both at the same time (although you can easily miss both
at the same time :)). Linear equations are easy to solve and analyze,
but they are linear. You can't easily solve arbitrary equations.
Analysis requires restricting synthesis and vice versa.

In IT world, demands are diverse and in order to fullfill them,
information systems are layered, with synthetic properties increasing
and analytic properties decreasing on each layer.

Ada has several restricted profiles and restricting tools (AdaControl,
SPARK) that give it opportunity to reside into inner(analytical) layers,
but building a cool OS also requires synthetic properties not present in
Ada. 100% Ada makes no sense.

> created by "Dmitry Kazakov" have

Usenet is not bash. Disaster won't happen if you omit quotes around
names here.

> Also, as for "XPCOM, GLib, NSObject".  Those are old school!

Given the same circumstances and the same goals, people are likely to
produce the same solutions.

What is new school then? "100% Ada" says nothing about the approach it
is gonna be implemented.

> A lot of C project are created, violates the Ada RM, which gives one
> reason they should be no mix language support in this OS.

Let C go alone. What about Free Pascal, Cyclone, Limbo etc. developers?
Do you want to shut the door for them? Why?

-- 
If you want to get to the top, you have to start at the bottom