Re: Ada used in General Aviation (GA) applications?

["Alexander E. Kopilovich" <aek@VB1162.spb.edu>]

Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:

> >    - What was the cost of learning C++ ?
>
> Nothing. You can program for our customers in C while learning C++.

Yes, at least I always managed to do that. What is significant here, is that
you can program in C inside C++ classes and their methods.

> C++ is nothing more than C with Classes and the Template Library.

This is appropriate viewpoint for dealing with C++ programs using C.

> >    - What was the cost of learning Java/JSP/EJB/.../.../... ?
>
> Nothing. You can program for our customers in C while learning Java.

Almost yes, at least I always managed to do that; but I knew in advance about
threads and inheritance - without that it would be practically impossible
to write many sorts of Java programs.

> Java is nothing more than C++ only using a sligthly different syntax.

Plus threads and interfaces (you can avoid interfaces in you own code, but
you still must understand them in a code produced by your co-worker or
predecessor).

And minus enumerations.

> The libs are easy to use: Just tune an example from the next website.

Perhaps "just try an example from the next website" would be more proper
expression -;)

>    - What was (will be) the cost of learning C# and .NET ?
>
> Nothing. You can program for our customers in C while learning C#.

I think this is mostly wrong statement - because C# contains too many small
things that weren't in C/C++ (for one little example - boxing), and those
things will appear too often in code produced by your co-workers and
predecessors. If you don't know them you'll be unable to understand code,
that was written by your neighbour (or subcontractor). You'll guess in those
place and sometimes you'll miss.

So you may not be proficient in C#, but you still must be somehow acquitanted
with it.

> C# is nothing more than C++ only using a sligthly different syntax.

It depends on which C++ you have used before. I think that if you used
Borland's C++ Builder, it will be nearer to truth (although even in this case
not quite true) than if you used MSVC or CodeWarrior or GCC.

> .Net is easy to use: Just tune an example from the MSDN.

This may be true as long as you have no uncommon needs.

> > I've never heard these arguments for other language that Ada, does it
> > really cost nothing ?
>
> It look other than C. You can't be productive while learning.

If you have Pascal (well, Object Pascal/Delphi) background in addition to
your C background then probably you can do the same thing - you can consider
Ada as Object Pascal with slightly different syntax.

> There are no examples on other websites how to implement the current task.

And this is indeed great difference.

>...
>There is a very simple, but important fact against Ada: The whole Network
>and OS interfaces are written in C.

Actually, the absence of their Ada counterparts is correlated with the
scarcity of Ada examples.




Alexander Kopilovich                      aek@vib.usr.pu.ru
Saint-Petersburg
Russia