Re: Beginning Ada Programming, by Andrew T. Shvets (2020)

[Optikos <ZUERCHER_Andreas@outlook.com>]

On Thursday, April 23, 2020 at 4:07:34 PM UTC-5, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Andrew Shvets <andrew.shvets@gmail.com> writes:
> > Ada has an amazing type system and it can do great things.  But it’s a
> > complex topic and I want to introduce it in a different way than is
> > usually found in most books.
> 
> I think these days (and maybe always), Ada is not a great choice of
> first language for programmers.  Its strength is in its special
> characteristics that are things that beginners would usually not use.
> So imho, it doesn't seem all that worthwhile to start an Ada book with
> beginner-level topics.
> 
> The popular beginner language these days is Python.  I use Python a lot
> myself, though I have become somewhat disillusioned with it.

There are 2 different definitions of beginner:
1) Someone who is a beginner at programming in any imperative programming language.
versus
2) Someone who is versed to an adequate degree of proficiency in another imperative programming language and who is now learning Ada as a 2nd … Nth imperative programming language added to their repertoire.

There is quite a need for category #2 to compare similarities and contrast differences to the reader's prior knowledge.  Conversely, category #1's time has unfortunately passed is by in 2 phases:
a) the Green-Ada80-Ada83 fervor build-up to the mid- to late-1980s where some DoD-centric universities taught the preponderance of their undergraduate programming curriculum via the Ada83 interpreter; and
b) the Ada9X-Ada95 fervor build-up to the early- to mid-1990s where a far greater quantity of universities taught the preponderance of their undergraduate programming curriculum via GNAT, prior to the Java juggernaut displacing Ada in the universities.

Only some future popularity of Ada in industrial practice or in open-source would drive a 3rd wave of Ada being taught at the freshman or sophomore levels of very many universities again.