Re: What is wrong with Ada?

[<adaworks@sbcglobal.net>]

"Markus E Leypold" <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> 
wrote in message
>
> So perhaps most of the people don't write safety-critical software?
> And there is, consider, more than one kind of safety ...
>
Granted.   I am not a one-language person.   It is always a matter
of choosing the right tool for the right job.

I was once asked by a three-star general whether he should be
converting all his Fortran code to Ada, as many on his staff wanted
to do.  I gave him my opinion as, "No."   Old code that has worked
a long time is almost always better than new code that has not yet
proven itself in the field, regardless of what language is used.

In his environment, there were a lot of programs that needed to be
written other than translating the Fortran.  It seemed to me that those
who wanted to translate Fortran were simply avoiding the new problems
that were waiting to be solved, and that could best be solved in Ada.

A large bank was persuaded to do a bunch of projects in Java.   It was
a stupid decision, and that soon became apparent.  All the other code
in the bank was in COBOL.  My advice.  Instead of using Java or
C++, or even Ada, train the programmers to use Object-oriented
COBOL.  Java is a terrible choice for business data processing where
there is a lot of accounting activity.  C++ is probably worse.   Ada
could work because of the built-in accounting-oriented data types,
but that would also a wrong choice for this environment.

We live in a multi-language world.  Perhaps it would be better if we
didn't.   However, there does not exist, at present, any single language
that is superior for every kind of programming problem in every context.
One thing I like about Ada that is not as well-formed in other languages
is the Annex C, Interfacing to Other Languages facility.   Ada is more
hospitable to other programming languages than most of the alternatives.

Richard Riehle