From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a6b:1702:: with SMTP id 2-v6mr11921574iox.101.1525491212004; Fri, 04 May 2018 20:33:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4509:: with SMTP id w9-v6mr2058195ote.10.1525491211726; Fri, 04 May 2018 20:33:31 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!v8-v6no1978537itc.0!news-out.google.com!15-v6ni2152itg.0!nntp.google.com!u74-v6no864040itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 20:33:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.233.194; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.233.194 References: <1c73f159-eae4-4ae7-a348-03964b007197@googlegroups.com> <94bd81e5-2ef5-41a2-973a-72f2ba4cecd1@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <721a01f5-569a-4cec-b0e9-62d19e1443fb@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: How to get Ada to "cross the chasm"? From: "Dan'l Miller" Injection-Date: Sat, 05 May 2018 03:33:31 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:51997 Date: 2018-05-04T20:33:31-07:00 List-Id: On Friday, May 4, 2018 at 6:48:21 PM UTC-5, Randy Brukardt wrote: > "Dan'l Miller" wrote in message=20 > news:94bd81e5-2ef5-41a2-973a-72f2ba4cecd1@googlegroups.com... > ... > >Ultimately it comes down to: Rust's borrow checker in Ada would embrace > >accesses as much as references in Rust and smart-pointers in modern C++, > >but the trend of modern Ada is to de-emphasize accesses. >=20 > Yes, that's one approach (see AI12-0240-1 for how that could work in Ada)= . Wow! That AI would be a big part of causing Ada2020 to cross the chasm. T= he only portion that I wholeheartedly disagree with is: !priority Very_Low= . Ada2020 needs this AI and task safety. Jettison everything else if that= is what it takes get those 2 accomplished. Ada2020 needs a clear purpose = (safety, safety, safety) or else Ada will have less & less reason to exist = (as Rust 2.X or 3.X perhaps becomes safer than Ada2012). Without these 2, = Rust is eventually going to eat Ada's safety lunch (and C++ will continue e= ating away at Ada from whatever amorphous-amoeba niche that modern C++ has = carved out: rodeo-broncho-rider type inference convoluting the move semant= ics, pretty darned awesome lambdas, and force-fit-syntaxed Turing-complete = templates) I agree with you being the make-it-work-with-all-features-of-Ada task maste= r=E2=80=94good job! I agree with Tucker wholeheartedly on: =E2=80=9C=E2=80=A6 in my view, safe storage management is a huge issue, and many languages have adopted full garbage collection, not because it is a "good thing," but merely because having to deal with storag= e leaks and dangling references is so painful. =E2=80=9CI think if Ada had a "mode" in which all storage management was sa= fe and automatic, and there were no dangling references or storage leaks, and yet also no asynchronous garbage collector meaning that real-time guarantees ar= e straightforward, all in the presence of multitasking and/or parallelism, th= is would be =E2=80=A2=E2=80=A2truly extraordinary=E2=80=A2=E2=80=A2. =E2=80=A6= =E2=80=9D It will be fascinating to see your forthcoming counter-proposal to this AI.