Re: Microsoft .Net, Ada should be at the head of this list

[Pascal Obry <p.obry@wanadoo.fr>]

Gerhard Hï¿œring <gerhard@bigfoot.de> writes:

> Pascal Obry wrote in comp.lang.ada:
> > Gerhard Hï¿œring <gerhard@bigfoot.de> writes:
> > 
> >> qualification, and more. For _a lot_ of projects, I'd personally not
> >> recommend to use Ada.
> > 
> > Which kinds ? Just curious.
> 
> Web applications, 

I do that all the time... with AWS of course :)

> fat clients accessing databases and everything where

I have done that, and now with GNADE I do not see any problem here.

> the cost of producing libraries, that are easily available for other
> languages would not be justified.

What about SOAP ?

> But the O. P. and I were speaking about distributed development in the
> sense of a development team that is distributed among different

Ok, and in this case I think Ada is very good. The fact that specs and bodies
are separated, the child libraries... make it easier to split the project in
modules and to have different teams working on each one. You can  even build
some dummy bodies just to test other units and replaced the dummy bodies by the
right implementation when finished... Anyway all this is common in Ada and the
support in the language is very good.

Ada is good for large projects and large projects are very often distributed.

Just my 2 cents,
Pascal.

-- 

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"
--|
--| gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-key C1082595