Re: Ada vs. Rust for low level system software

[Kevin Chadwick <kc-usenet@chadwicks.me.uk>]

>Since Ada is mainly used in this area, why has Rust, which is much
>younger language, and target this same area has gained so much
>popularity but not Ada?
>

Adas ranged type system coupled with it's excellent record overlays make Ada
 a much better choice than Rust. For safe and easy hardware register and
 network protocols.

I can't imagine that ownership for data structures on a single runtime is
 the reason (before SPARK got support).

A lot of Ada code will not run on any runtime but Rust also has nostd for
 embedded use.

They often say Rust has excellent C interfacing support but Adas appears to
 be even better.

Perhaps it is ease of use and guide availability which has improved or
 simply perception and a lack of knowledge about Ada.

Rather than language merits. A lot of people only care about job
 availabilty, money and library availability today but might consider a risk
 if they perceive a future demand increase.

As to why the likes of Google and Microsoft are putting money behind it when
 Ada would have been a better investment. You would have to ask them. Tell
 me why Google continues to write security sensitive code like matter in
 C++? When it could be written in Ada or Rust with a C binding.

Even javascript engines like Mozillas spidermonkey still has so little Rust
 code. Though Mozilla does have more financial concerns and it's competitors
 are already trying to say their browsers are faster. Yet Googles websites
 use umpteen domains slowing browsing down anyway.

-- 
Regards, Kc