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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,c406e0c4a6eb74ed X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews2.google.com!not-for-mail From: kevin.cline@gmail.com (Kevin Cline) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: ADA Popularity Discussion Request Date: 26 Aug 2004 14:52:39 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <49dc98cf.0408110556.18ae7df@posting.google.com> <4CsVc.28876$9Y6.4063@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 170.215.188.12 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1093557160 14735 127.0.0.1 (26 Aug 2004 21:52:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 21:52:40 +0000 (UTC) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3055 Date: 2004-08-26T14:52:39-07:00 List-Id: Jeffrey Carter wrote in message news:<4CsVc.28876$9Y6.4063@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>... > Kevin Cline wrote: > > > I think the very existence of limited types is a fundamental flaw in > > Ada. > > The ability to create types for which there are no operations except > those defined by the developer is essential for creating useful > abstractions. Since the creation of useful abstractions is the hallmark > of software engineering, it is not surprising that Ada is the language > of choice for the 2% of developers who are software engineers, and > disliked by the 98% who are coders and should not be allowed to design > software of any importance. > > > It doesn't matter to me that weak programmers can theoretically make a > > mess in C++. What matters is the amount of effort required for a good > > programmer to produce sound code, and Ada is simply not competitive > > for most applications. > > It is the ease with which even very good developers make messes in C++ > that has led to the decline in its popularity, and many are looking at > Java, C#, and Ada for a better alternative. I suppose we have different definitions of "very good". I see the same developers who made messes in C++ making messes in C# and Java. The only difference in C# and Java is that the mess is not so obvious.