Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!adm!dsill@NSWC-OAS.arpa From: dsill@NSWC-OAS.arpa (Dave Sill) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: \"C\" vrs ADA Message-ID: <8935@brl-adm.ARPA> Date: Fri, 21-Aug-87 11:22:16 EDT Article-I.D.: brl-adm.8935 Posted: Fri Aug 21 11:22:16 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 23-Aug-87 01:21:47 EDT Sender: news@brl-adm.ARPA Lines: 57 >From: John Unekis > The ada language is far more than just a language. Ada includes > standards for editors,compilers, and run-time symbolic debuggers. The DoD standards define both the Ada language and the environment under which it runs. It *is* possible to have the language without the full environment. > : > This standard was > named ADA, (the name of the mistress of Charles Babbage, who ...the *benefactor* of Charles Babbage, who... > invented a punched card driven loom, considered to be the first invented a mechanical computer called the Difference Engine... (Jacquard invented the punched-card driven loom.) > computer, she was rumored to be the first person to ever write > a program on punched cards- why her name is appropriate for a > real-time language is a mystery). Why not? > ... As long as > computers remain basically Von Neuman processors, no language is > going to offer any advantages in the real world to a language > like COBOL. Wrong. > No business is going to go through the 3 to 5 years > effort of retraining and converting of existing code just to > satisfy the dogmatic prejudices of computer-science weenies. Right, but there are *real* disadvantages to languages like COBOL that can very definitely make retraining and converting worthwhile, especially when migrating to new hardware. Us computer science weenies are in a position to evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of various programming environments; and we try to promote those that we feel have the most to offer in a particular situation. I don't use Ada, but I know enough about it to know that I probably wouldn't like programming in it. And as a computer scientist I question whether it will ever be a viable real-time programming language. It seems like its goals are self-contradictory: to provide every imaginable feature with high performance real-time execution. At least they aren't asking for quick compilation. :-) -David Sill "Faith is believing what you know ain't true." dsill@nswc-oas.arpa -Anonymous schoolboy The opinions expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Navy.