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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,42490cad53ee37fa X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!proxad.net!freenix!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: "Alexander E. Kopilovich" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: NOACE- End of the road for Ada? Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:15:16 +0300 (MSK) Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1110950248 16792 212.85.156.195 (16 Mar 2005 05:17:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 05:17:28 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org Return-Path: In-Reply-To: ; from Marin David Condic at Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:52:22 GMT X-Mailer: Mail/@ [v2.45 MSDOS] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Original-Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9461 Date: 2005-03-16T08:15:16+03:00 Marin David Condic wrote: > Well, there you have to take a look around you to see what people are > using in a problem domain to help them get to an end product. Here you assume that everyone who has prudent interest in aiding Ada can see in one's neighbourhood some software development using Ada in some problem domain. This is wrong assumption. Although it is "almost correct" numerically, it is still fundamentally wrong. And note, that exactly this assumption is a major difference between Ada world and the worlds of other well-known languages. > In my current class of applications, one of the big tools is Simulink. > That's just one example since we're still talking about embedded systems > and there are a whole slew of things that go into that sort of > development. But its stuff like that where Ada often comes up short - or > at best a weak "Me Too!!!" player. OK, Simulink. If I understand it properly, Simulink is a package that comes with MatLab (or there is another Simulink?). Search in Google quickly shows that there are some products, which support Ada with Simulink (at least those from universities). Probably you know or even use those products, and came to conclusion that they all are deficient comparing with Simulink support tools for C++. So how can those deficiences be described generally/summarily ? Are they buggy, incomplete, poorly documented ? Or they are fundamentally inferior, being essentially "Ada tools for Simulink" instead of "Simulink tools for Ada" ?