Re: Recent Ada Information (was: zhttp://www.aceshardware.com/Spades/r

[Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <u1yn5kgv0.fsf@ctwd0143.fitlinxx.com>, David Bolen <db3l@fitlinxx.com> writes:

> Not to derail the better language discussion, but I'm not a current
> Ada user and have been lurking for a bit here following the various
> URLs and what not, and I was curious about one thing I noticed.
> 
> I can't help but be struck by the fact that in almost all cases
> (clearly there were a few exceptions), the various documents and
> comparisions, and studies, and even some FAQs that I'm able to track
> down all seem to be years old at this point (some over 5 years).

The last (and only the second) standard for the language is from 1995.
Almost any project you can imagine doing in Ada has issues more critical
than needing new features in the language.   The facts don't change,
so the FAQs don't change.

As for studies, while some may feel that the model train comparison
is not up to the detail level of testing a cure for cancer, others
are of the opinion that for _their_ project having yet another study
is not really crucial.

What _is_ new in recent years is available source samples for various
projects and utilities.  People in a position to share their code are
doing so (while others fuss over license scheme battles).

Remember, the newsgroup is where people argue about Ada, not where
they get work done.