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: tmoran on 20 May 2010 21:08 >The language is good for embedded, real-time, and safety-critical >software >where high reliability is required. It is often used in the space I run a TV channel with Ada. It handles downloading video files, loading from DVDs and timing shows, inserting ad-size clips, archiving old shows, scheduling (and notifying TV Guide et al), and of course playing on Comcast and UVerse. Reliability, concurrency, real-time (one second or less), catching exceptions, are important.
From: Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) on 20 May 2010 22:17 Le Fri, 21 May 2010 02:30:52 +0200, Marc A. Criley <mcNOSPAM(a)mckae.com> a écrit: > While not so much an explicit *resource* site, the Ada sub-reddit > (http://www.reddit.com/r/ada) contains links to articles, discussions, > software libraries, projects, and is just a potpourri of Ada goodness. > Just start paging back through the submissions... > > Submissions are welcome from any and all Ada fans. Please, Welcome for any kind of project or is it restricted to GPL project ? I keep this in my bookmarks, perhaps this may be useful in the futur (well, to me, I guess it is already useful for many people). Also, is it english only or is there some provision to inform about articles in french ? Thanks for the tip -- There is even better than a pragma Assert: a SPARK --# check.
From: Randy Brukardt on 21 May 2010 01:09 "Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene(a)yahoo.fr> wrote in message news:op.vc0f0zz8xmjfy8(a)garhos... >I remember Jean-Pierre Rosen, telling how some people think there is not >library available in Ada for this and that. He explained most of of times, >people was surprised when he gave them a link to the material they were >seeking for. > >Here is a list of bindings which may be of interest (I'm not using this >material myself, so cannot tell more): >http://archive.adaic.com/docs/flyers/free-bindings.html The archive site contains ancient web pages of dubious value. Look on the main AdaIC web site for such things, particularly in the links section: http://www.adaic.com/links/index.html in the classifications "Software Libraries" and "Development Tools". (And tell me about any broken links.) Another way to find specific Ada stuff is to use the Ada-wide search engine: http://www.adaic.com/site/wide-search.html, which attempts to search all sites with known Ada information (this corresponds to the sites linked from the AdaIC site). It uses a search engine written in Ada (of course); we crawl all of the sites at least monthly. As of the crawl completed this morning, there were 59,172 Ada-related pages in the index. Randy.
From: Randy Brukardt on 21 May 2010 01:18 "Gautier write-only" <gautier_niouzes(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:20261ff7-36bd-483e-9d79-af3ab44e2c7f(a)q13g2000vbm.googlegroups.com... >That's exactly the problem with web homes: they need lots of >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... I think there are 4 that I know of. Unless you are also including AdaIC, which is definitely not abandoned, just suffering from the lack of new material. If you know of something that ought to be linked on AdaIC, by all means send it in. And keep in mind that the archives at the AdaIC is generally ancient content that we preserved from the old government run AdaIC. Most of it is of dubious value (a few things, like the on-line Ada 83 RM, get a lot of use and still have value to some). But I don't like deleting stuff when storage is essentially free. If it has that "archives.adaic.com" address, its in the archives. Stick to www.adaic.org or www.adaic.com for modern stuff. Randy. (Webmaster of the moment for AdaIC).
From: Dmitry A. Kazakov on 21 May 2010 03:58
On Thu, 20 May 2010 23:29:36 +0200, Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57) wrote: > I would say it is good for core implementations, where no higher level > paradigms was shown to be better suited ; that is, most of system-level > and most of core application-level. For higher levels, there is a galaxy > specific-domain-languages which may be better. 1. They are not higher level. It is a usual misconception. To be closer to the application domain /= higher level. Usually domain-specific languages are of an extremely low level. You normally are unable to develop higher (rather any) abstractions there. You are limited to the built in ones. Domain specific languages usually lack type system, certainly have no user-defined types (ADTs), provide no mechanisms for decompositions etc. You can consider it on the examples of UML, XML, SQL, Simulink etc. 2. They aren't better, at least from the SW engineering POV. Usually you can quickly get the job done for some simple or else well-decoupled case. Far more often you get 80% done. But the rest 20% is almost impossible to accomplish, because these languages are too specialized, too weak, unsuitable for integration, design of large systems, unmaintainable. You will have to write some insertions in a "working" language like Ada. E.g. S-function for Simulink etc. This might work, or not, because there is a question of the ugly SW architecture these languages would impose on your solution. I don't believe in domain-specific languages, 4GL, 5GL etc. I have seen too many of them. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de |