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: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!gandalf.srv.welterde.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!loke.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT GPL is not shareware Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 14:44:18 -0600 Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation Message-ID: References: <0Kgqw.953330$_k.685364@fx16.iad> <199c826a-923e-497f-a8e2-9e732c8a5665@googlegroups.com> <87bnmetex4.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <4ae7f0d5-d681-4be9-95bc-b5e789b3ad40@googlegroups.com> <87tx06rve6.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <87lhlirpk0.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <4984c229-bdcd-4032-bd88-cde66482e6df@googlegroups.com> <6950687c-7b03-440e-ba15-e1092f86a3d0@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: rrsoftware.com X-Trace: loke.gir.dk 1422909859 9838 24.196.82.226 (2 Feb 2015 20:44:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 20:44:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:24851 Date: 2015-02-02T14:44:18-06:00 List-Id: "Jedi Tek'Unum" wrote in message news:6950687c-7b03-440e-ba15-e1092f86a3d0@googlegroups.com... > On Friday, January 30, 2015 at 2:15:34 PM UTC-6, Randy Brukardt wrote: ... >> having a vibrant array of choices in both programming languages and >> implementations thereof, you really only have one choice for each >> (dressed >> up in different packages, but the same thing underlying). > > There are many proprietary (or non-GCC) C/C++ compilers. Every system > vendor > has one. Right. But... ... >> Plenty of other professional languages "are held hostage", because they >> don't even exist (at least in any usable form). There is no way to get >> them >> built, because there is no hope of making any money on them. All one gets >> is > > So here we are 30+ years since Ada was created and 20+ years since GNAT > was created. An ISO standard language. Still fractured (3 different > levels - FSF/GPL/Pro) and still huge platform availability barriers. Now you're complaining that there is *too* much choice in Ada. That's weird, Linux doesn't seem to have a problem with too much "fracturing" (Ubuntu, Debian, Red Hat, ad nausum...). Nor with platform availability (during most of its history, it was only practically available on x86). Not much difference between Linux and GNAT on that. If Ada has a problem, it's that the alternative implementations are weak (and expensive in most cases). A truly vibrant community has lots of implementations (there were over 80 implementations of Ada 83). And the existence of strong standards and a test suite everyone agreed upon meant (and still does) that changing implementations is relatively painless compared to other languages. > Ada is not going to grow until that is fixed. Ada has to become a tool > that is used to make money, not the money maker itself. Linux seems > to survive that way. > > As long as the predominate maker of Ada technology refuses to enter > the 21st century then Ada is hostage. Can't even imagine what you mean by this. Ada, as tool, will never make as much money as less professional languages. That's because you can't sell ongoing maintance to fix software that works right (and thus doesn't need to be fixed). Thus, there is very little advantage to using Ada as a contractor who makes a living creating software for others. Ada's real advantage is within a vertically integrated company - where lower maintance cost is actually as saving. But such an organization provides no opportunities for the tools creator - they'll use the lowest cost stuff that they can find that does the job; and moreover, if they're truly into saving money, they're unlikely to spend a lot of money on creating tools, and if they do they'll keep them in house. The people who can make money at this have to build things that need a lot of fixing (and some lock-in), and Ada programs aren't (usually) in that category. AdaCore is doing the only thing that makes sense to monitize Ada. If there was any other way that made sense, my guess is that AdaCore would have tried it already. Sadly, I don't think there is much future for doing things well, because for that one can neither sell maintenance nor get much effort for improvement. Which ultimately leads to a bleak future for humanity, IMHO. Randy.