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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: backlog3.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jeffrey Carter Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada platforms and pricing, was: Re: a new language, designed for safety ! Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:01:00 -0700 Organization: Also freenews.netfront.net; news.tornevall.net; news.eternal-september.org Message-ID: References: <1402308235.2520.153.camel@pascal.home.net> <85ioo9yukk.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <255b51cd-b23f-4413-805a-9fea3c70d8b2@googlegroups.com> <5ebe316d-cd84-40fb-a983-9f953f205fef@googlegroups.com> <2100734262424129975.133931laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org> <857442918424729589.090275laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 17:01:02 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ba346f17b503f6aa8ecbfd6d1e2a9f59"; logging-data="22422"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18VacfJ0ebyL88RdFugodOI+sy3ftXL6oY=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 In-Reply-To: Cancel-Lock: sha1:C/jkrvi0ngMhzh5BcBwErYgKEB8= Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:187054 Date: 2014-06-18T10:01:00-07:00 List-Id: On 06/18/2014 12:09 AM, Natasha Kerensikova wrote: > > And has been already pointed out (IIRC by Jacob Sparre Andersen), the > "2% argument" doesn't really counter that, since compiler avilability > probably drives away a significant part of those 2%ters. > > Myself, for example. I'm here only because a few years ago, sheer luck > made me stumble upon wikipedia page for Steelman requirements, and > because GNAT-AUX made Ada available freely on my platform of choice > (FreeBSD/intel, which I believe to be a comparatively easy target). This is more likely the reason many software engineers don't use Ada: they are not aware of it. You stumbled upon Ada by accident; how many others who would use Ada have not been so lucky? I don't think free-compiler availability is part of it. There are free compilers for the most common development environments (Windows and various forms of Unix) to allow such people to learn and experiment with the language. Once they get to the point of wanting to use it on obscure platform X they're already hooked. -- Jeff Carter "When Bell Labs were invited to evaluate C against the DoD requirements [for Ada], they said that there was no chance of C meeting the requirements of readability, safety, etc. for which we were striving, and that it should not even be on the list of evaluated languages." William Whitaker 116