Ada noob here! Is Ada widely used?
in [ADA]
|
Prev: Symbolic tracebacks on Debian (Was: About static libraries and Debian policy)
Next: Gnat cross compiler
From: Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) on 21 May 2010 19:44 Le Sat, 22 May 2010 01:05:33 +0200, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl(a)ml1.net> a écrit: > Nothing too terribly mind-boggling! ;) Just don't want to spend the time > learning a "soon-to-be" fossil of a language, with no where to go but in > a > museum. It had a long live, and will have a long live again. The goo word could be âpersistentâ. It started at the end of the years 1970, first standardized in 1983, revised in someway, the again revised in 1995 with many additions which make it the first standardized OO language (while Ada does not handle OO the same way as others), then again revised in 2005, and the next revision is planned for 2012 or 2015 (I feel lost with this date... should be 2015, while many people are talking about 2012). It was modern, in its early age, starting with Ada 83. It is unlikely that something which was ahead in 1983 and which in 1983, already embedded paradigms still totally unknown of most of 2010 languages, it is unlikely such a thing can be referred to as a âfossilâ. Don't be afraid for that. Not popular, does not implies bad (and popular does not implies good). -- There is even better than a pragma Assert: a SPARK --# check.
From: Duke Normandin on 21 May 2010 19:53 On 2010-05-21, Yannick Duch�ne <yannick_duchene(a)yahoo.fr> wrote: > Le Sat, 22 May 2010 01:07:46 +0200, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl(a)ml1.net> a > �crit: >> Thanks for putting SPARK in the proper perspective for me. I guessed >> that it >> might be a specialized incarnation of Ada, but wasn't quite sure. > This is far more strict and has far more requirements on the design, it > takes really more long to create an application with SPARK and full > validity conditions proofs. That was the reason to suggest you to start > with Ada, instead of SPARK. Don't bother any way, as on the way to learn > Ada, you will also learn part of SPARK, as the latter relies on the former. > Good point! -- Duke *** Tolerance becomes a crime, when applied to evil [Thomas Mann] ***
From: Jeffrey R. Carter on 21 May 2010 19:55 Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) wrote: > > It started at the end of the years 1970, first standardized in 1983, Ada was 1st standardized in 1980, MIL-STD-1815 (1980 Dec 10). -- Jeff Carter "C's solution to this [variable-sized array parameters] has real problems, and people who are complaining about safety definitely have a point." Dennis Ritchie 25
From: Duke Normandin on 21 May 2010 20:00 On 2010-05-21, Yannick Duch�ne <yannick_duchene(a)yahoo.fr> wrote: > Le Sat, 22 May 2010 01:05:33 +0200, Duke Normandin <dukeofperl(a)ml1.net> a > �crit: >> Nothing too terribly mind-boggling! ;) Just don't want to spend the time >> learning a "soon-to-be" fossil of a language, with no where to go but in >> a >> museum. > It had a long live, and will have a long live again. > The goo word could be ?persistent?. > > It started at the end of the years 1970, first standardized in 1983, > revised in someway, the again revised in 1995 with many additions which > make it the first standardized OO language (while Ada does not handle OO > the same way as others), then again revised in 2005, and the next revision > is planned for 2012 or 2015 (I feel lost with this date... should be 2015, > while many people are talking about 2012). > > It was modern, in its early age, starting with Ada 83. It is unlikely that > something which was ahead in 1983 and which in 1983, already embedded > paradigms still totally unknown of most of 2010 languages, it is unlikely > such a thing can be referred to as a ?fossil?. > > Don't be afraid for that. Not popular, does not implies bad (and popular > does not implies good). I didn't mean to say that Ada _was_ a fossil! When I originally asked the question, I simply wanted to be sure that I was not in fact about to embark on an archaeological expedition. ;) -- Duke *** Tolerance becomes a crime, when applied to evil [Thomas Mann] ***
From: Stephen Leake on 22 May 2010 05:57
Duke Normandin <dukeofperl(a)ml1.net> writes: > On 2010-05-20, Gautier write-only <gautier_niouzes(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> On May 20, 8:58 pm, Duke Normandin wrote: >> >>> >http://archive.adaic.com/docs/flyers/free-bindings.html >>> >>> That URL is not much good - all the links are dead! >>> >>> Perhaps Ada should have a _real_ home, where it is guaranteed that noob >>> students, and noob old farts like me will indeed find the resources needed >>> to make Ada shine! ;) >> >> That's exactly the problem with web homes: they need lots of >> maintenance. > > Every web site worth having require maintenance... > >> Once the time for it is gone, they become ghost homes - to begin with >> dead links... >> I could cite around 4-5 absolutely definitive enthusiastic "Ada homes" >> at different stage of abandon... >> The wiki's Manuel is citing are in a better shape because of a better >> concept. >> Other good places to chase resources are also non Ada-centric sites: > > Very good reason why the Ada community should encourage one "official" Home > with links to various community resources - an "official" Ada "Information > Booth". www.adaic.com -- -- Stephe |