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: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-13 10:52:18 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.uchicago.edu!news.cc.uic.edu!aanews.merit.edu!gumby.it.wmich.edu!news-out1.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in-sterling.nuthinbutnews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!nwrdny02.gnilink.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "Stephane Richard" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 17:52:16 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.44.80.239 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: nwrdny02.gnilink.net 1063475536 129.44.80.239 (Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:52:16 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:52:16 EDT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42451 Date: 2003-09-13T17:52:16+00:00 List-Id: Here's my perception. This is from the many messages that exist in this thread, since I'm responding to many comments that were made, I just decided to put it here in the hierarchy of messages pertaining to this thread. If the millitary switches to Java, it will shoot itself in the foot. Especially if they expect the same kind of: a. Performances (Java is slower than Ada, in many places I consider essential) b. Readability and Udnerstandability of Code c. Any kind of standard. A datatype is NOT an object and Java thinks it is. What to make of that? drop in performances automatically. Many Java projects I did in the first release of Java I basically gave up on when the JDK 2 came out....what qbout JDK3, 4 or 5 when they pop up? I dont think have Ada centralized as it is right now will stopp innovation, I believe it will rather stop Innovation in the wrong direction which is a good thing in my book. We all know what we want in the new Ada. For a language to evolve and adapt to new realities, it needs the foundations to do so and Java and C++ just dont have it....not as far as reliability is concerned and given methods of controling resource/tasking/memory management just aren't there in Java or C++ for any truely reliable realtime systems the boehm Demers Garbage collection model does have it's flaws and is stated that garbage collections happens when it can, not necessarily when it should...which defeats the purpose in my book....Although I realize that for languages such asJava and C++ it's probably the only way to achieve a somewhat "adequate" garbage collection. but it's far from perfect and depending on what it is collecting it can be very irregularly called upon which makes memory management tricky at best. What I would like to see in Ada 200X is a true console library...I dont mean as compared to Text_IO, I'd like simple things such as Text color, background color, etc etc....as part of the Ada Standard. there's one library that implements an interface to the conio C library. I'd like to see that as part of Ada in an OS independant manner, of course :-).. And it is not true, even for a big project, that every is better coded in an OOP environment. there are situations that can do without OOP even today. Ada is capable of both OO and Modular paradigms and that's one thing Java just doesn't do. Java Tasking and Ada Tasking are quite similar but again a few key Ada features simply dont exist in Java and those features, to me, are what makes Ada's tasking so good. So Java just doesn't cut it for me. Likewise, Java "thinks" it solved the multiplatform issues by providing it's own GUI layer. That might be good, in it's own context as far as Java is Concerned. But there are definite flaws in this architecture. So to me, Java is not the way to go for many types of applications, especially realtime and embedded. So in my book, there's many reasons why Java and C++ aren't my first choices when it comes many categories of projects...Granted C/C++ mya be more suited for a certain range of applications. but Java isn't even a viable solution to anything I can think of. It has yet to mature considerably for many fields. -- St�phane Richard Senior Software and Technology Supervisor http://www.totalweb-inc.com For all your hosting and related needs "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" wrote in message news:NGs6b.10770$Pa1.519789@read1.cgocable.net... > This is not a troll... but I am soliciting some opinion. > > I read a disturbing article in the July COTS Journal recently, > and thought I would bounce the controversial aspects off > of the group. The complete article can be read at: > > http://www.cotsjournalonline.com/pdfs/2003/07/COTS07_softside.pdf > > I have quoted some of the sections for ease of discussion below: > > From Article: > > Softer Side: Java in the Military > Java Proving Itself Worthy for Defense Apps > July 2003 COTS Journal [ 27 ] > > ... > > Navy's Open Architecture > ======================== > > **** **** > > Among the key motivations for the military's interest in Java is a drive > to transition away from Ada. > > **** **** > > The feeling is that Java represents a modern and more commercially > available technology than alternatives. The Navy, for example, is > drafting their Navy Open Architecture Computing Environment (NOACE) to > be the standard for all future software systems on Navy warships. That > includes shipboard weapon systems, such as anti-aircraft cannon controls > as well as avionics systems aboard naval aircraft. The standard calls > for all new software to develop in either C++ or Java, and makes > specific mention of moving away from Ada. They plan to continue to use > Ada only as required to support legacy systems that have already been > developed. > > ... > > Moving Away from Ada > ==================== > > For its part, Boeing has also expressed a clear preference to move > toward Java. Winner of the lead system integrator contract on for U.S. > Army's Future Combat Systems (FCS) program, Boeing is farming out their > FCS requirements and telling suppliers they want to use Java, they don't > > **** **** > > like C++ and they don't like Ada for any new system development. Many > > **** **** > > suppliers to FCS are therefore tasked to convert reams of Ada code over > to Java. > > There are some basic human resources reasons why Java is a preferred > approach. Today's new graduates from college are 99% more likely to know > Java than any other programming language. And among experienced > programmers out in the workforce, more will tend to highlight Java on > their resume rather than Ada. The ranks of true Ada gurus are probably > comprised more of programmers near retirement than otherwise. > > > > > SOME OBSERVATIONS: > ================== > > I have seen many quotes here in comp.lang.ada and other web sources > that only the mandate to use Ada has been dropped. The position that > is usually made is that Ada is still considered on a project by > project basis, where it makes sense. > > However, if the above article is accurate, it seems that the U.S. > military (and Boeing) is making a conscious effort to move away from Ada. > The article is suggesting that the only reason to use Ada now would > be for legacy systems. Boeing apparently does not want to use Ada > in any new development. > > CONCLUSION: > > Whether or not you agree with the reasoning in the article, the > disturbing thing in my mind is the "mindset". If the military and big > industrial companies like Boeing turn their back on Ada, where is Ada > headed for in the future? Is there enough other momentum to keep Ada > (and GNAT) going into the foreseeable future? > > I attended a small Real-Time conference last week in Toronto, and I only > heard the name Ada mentioned once, and in a negative way > (in passing reference WRT Real-Time Java). None of the vendors there > that I talked to were using Ada for their SBC and the one vendor > for flight systems told me they simply do not have the customer > demand for Ada systems. > > So: Is the writing on the wall for Ada? > > What is your take on the article? > -- > Warren W. Gay VE3WWG > http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg > >