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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Five Years After
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 13:45:38 -0600
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <p3dnl5$m3u$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <p3cugr$2k5$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: nma@12000.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: yejh+rkR4p7fPX4l/TnExA.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.5.2
Content-Language: en-US
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:49892
Date: 2018-01-13T13:45:38-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 1/13/2018 6:36 AM, Jeffrey R. Carter wrote:
> In 2000, when ISO/IEC 8652:1995 was 5 years old, every compiler vendor had a
> compiler for it.
> 
> In 2012, when ISO/IEC 8652:2007 was 5 years old, about half of the comiler
> vendors had a compiler for it.
> 
> in 2017, when ISO/IEC 8652:2012 was 5 years old, one compiler vendor had a
> compiler for it.
> 
> Can we extrapolate and conclude that when Ada 2X is five years old, there will
> be no compiler vendors with a compiler for it?
> 

Did first a linear fit, so in 2023 (assuming this is when
Ada2X will be), it shows there will be -0.23799 compiler
vendors.

I used 2.5 vendors for 2012, which is half the 5 vendors
you said there were in 2000.

In[19]:= data={{2000,5},{2012,2.5},{2017,1}};
f= Fit[data, {1,x}, x] (*linear fit*)
Out[20]= 465.759 -0.230349 x  (*the line equation*)

f/.x->2023 (*see what happens at year 2023*)

Out[21]= -0.237991
-----------------

Using Quadratic fit, shows there will be -1.15588 compiler
vendors.

In[16]:= data={{2000,5},{2012,2.5},{2017,1}};
f= Fit[data, {1,x,x^2}, x]
Out[17]= -21276.4+21.425 x-0.00539216 x^2

f/.x->2023
Out[18]= -1.15588

Since it is not possible physically to have negative
compiler vendors, then using zero seems to make more
sense.

--Nasser