Re: Weakness of Ada is expensive / security / etc. ? Anything else?

["Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>]

I'll stick my nose in here where I think I have something different to say from
the responses so far.

On 07/17/2015 03:19 AM, Trish Cayetano wrote:
> 
> -	Ada complete language is too complex. True or False? If true, how?

That depends on the definition of "too complex". C++ is a popular and widely
used language with an RM longer than the Ada RM, though C++ lacks modules and
concurrency. Clearly if Ada is "too complex" then C++ is also "too complex".
That doesn't stop it from being popular and widely used. Ada will never be
popular, since it supports the way S/W engineers think, while languages like
C/++ are for coders who don't want to think at all before they start coding, and
there are a lot more coders than S/W engineers.

Also, Ada has a number of unnecessary features added in an attempt to be
popular, such as support for programming by extension and anonymous types.
Luckily most Ada features are orthogonal, so you can ignore these features and
use the well designed and less complex remaining features.

> -	Ada requires expensive compilers for large systems 

Requires? Hardly. There are free compilers which can handle systems of any size
as well as any expensive compiler. There may be other project requirements that
drive the project to an expensive compiler, but using Ada does not, in and of
itself, require expensive compilers for any systems.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Damn it, Jim, I'm an actor, not a doctor."
124