Re: Proving Correctness (was Java Portability)

["nicolas" <n.brunot@cadwin.com>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4642 bytes --]

"Georg Bauhaus" <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> a �crit dans le message
news: 9kb3ub$hdo$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de...
> You write about debutants, could you provide some reasoning why for
> these people there should be a more full grown environment than AdaGIDE?

I don't write only about debutants. Exactly the reasoning apply to
experimented programmers.
What I meant is that, in those languages, even debutants can find very
easily simple tools,
that experimented programmers are (or at least should be) very happy to
find.

> Is the Aonix product so far off for this group of people???

Aonix is smart enough to provide something looking like Visual C++, Apex is
not bad too.
But when people get stuck with one compiler because of the absence of
standard, while they hear about Ada concerns for reuse, portability etc ...
I understand they can be somewhat surprised ...

> You could of course say, pressing F9 to get a runnable executable
> is so much easier that getting to know Emacs & Co conventions (or
whatever)
> but that looks like a shortsighted self deception to me

Of course I could say !!  and by the way, most popular languages programmers
say it ...
They are not so stupid, because it is really much easier ...
However experimented I am, I have a very strange way of thinking :
When something is quite complicated and require experimented people,
if there is a way to safely simplify it so that a debutant can do it,
the experimented guy is likely to go much faster and safer using the simple
solution.
If he is not, give the job to the debutant ...

> (Yes I know the lament of
> debutants about the additional percentage of time devoted
> to studying compiler/IDE docs, but I also know debutants and programmers
> who actually _enjoyed_ learning about their toolset, because
> of the interesting concepts and "visible" machinery. (And I'm
> not debating the merits of powerful environments.)

Remember what Marin said about softwares
You should put the CD, see a standard install procedure pop up, and find
menus "file", "edit", "tools" in their expected palce, with expected
functions and behavior.
When standard and expected things are found, only after that, check the docs
to go further,
If not just throw the software away. There is no excuse.
He is right, and almost every software users do the same.
May be the problem of Ada language is that such an evidence is not an
evidence for too many Ada users.

> : - Ada has a lot of excellent qualities, but it is everything but
popular.
> : The lack of integrated environment
> [claimed by the author, but see above]

The fact that I claim it has absolutely no importance, we already use Ada,
and I am just one person.
The important point is that it is claimed by 99% of people who could think
in using Ada
If your product doesn't satisfy them, change the product or they'll forget
about your poduct, and they will be very wise to do so.
They know what they want, if you do not provide it, and if others provide
it, no hesitation ...
Every industry has understood such elementary evidence, software industry
started to understand it, those who don't understand will disappear ...

> What exactly? Certainly C++ became popular before there was
> today's STL. Then, certainly many Ada compilers come with libraries,
> since the RM has so much to say about them, e.g. for string
> processing. So I guess you mean container libraries or similar?
> Standard Database Interfaces? Numerical Algorithms? Graphics
> libraries? Encryption libraries?

Just have a look at a Java compiler. It is self-explanatory ...

>Only they are decoupled from each vendors compiler and
> are free for download instead.

May be the heart of the problem :-)

>Compare them to their equivalents
> (more or less) in Java 2 (not 1!).

Did you see how fast Java figured out the problem of providing libraries  ?
Once again compare a Java compiler and any Ada compiler.
while we hear on c.l.a. endless discussions about syntax, and that 18 year
after Ada83 and 6 years after Ada95 ?
Don't you think there could be some lesson to learn ?

> Would you agree that Ada will become more popular if every ADA IDE
> comes with a sticker
> "Prebuilt
> Booch Components Inside"?
> Could be a point...

Could be ?
Let's be serious
Everybody knows what popular languages compilers provide
Everybody knows what Ada compilers provide
Everybody can compare how widely they are used.

I cannot understand why so much time is lost in useless discussion while the
gap is growing.

Almost any software company knows that the marketing and the packaging of
the product is at least as important as its qualities.