Re: What's stopping you from using Ada for your next commercial project?

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Sun, 13 Mar 2011 12:38:06 +0100, Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57) wrote:

> Le Thu, 10 Mar 2011 15:31:46 +0100, Dmitry A. Kazakov  
> <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> a �crit:
>> The  difference
>> between 80's (when Ada and C++ were originated) and now is huge. Unless
>> really new computing paradigms arise (quantum, molecular computing),
> Will not be part of every-day use computers any way (this will target  
> communication and security, mainly).

If usable, they will replace old computers within a decade. The life cycle
of a computer is very short.

>> it is
>> perfectly clear how a good language must look like.
> Precisely no. What it must look like comes with experience, and  
> experiences requires some time.

30+ years is enough on any account.

> The issue here may just be backward compatibility (and to not be  
> forced to switch to any future standard),

It is always taken as an excuse not to do vital changes, note, before even
considering how these changes might look like.

You cannot improve language by small incremental changes. If you want this
then keeping it backward compatible is only possible by a big structural
change.

>>> BC++ is crap. If you have to target it, you can expect problems and I
>>> can understand that the combination with the other two is problematic.
>>
>> How a company which produced the first people's C++ compiler managed to
>> achieve this pitiful state 20 years later?

> Turbo Borland C++ was not good even since its early days (my first contact  
> with C++, with with Turbo Borland C++).

It was better than most contemporary C++ compilers.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de