Re: Why don't large companies use Ada?

Jeff Reinholz (reinholz_at_SG0D12.sig01) wrote:
: Spending a couple years with ada environments in the defense industry
: I can add my two cents worth as to how ada go a lousy reputation. One becuase
: of large object code and ada compiler companies inability to stick to
: a standard. Secondly because there are a vast number of C programmers and
: a comparitivly small handful of ada programmers to maintain code. Third that
: same readablility of code creates a over developed syntax that can be
: cumbersome in many applications. Forth because of object oriented
: requirements that ada does not match up with(some say C++ is more object
: oriented than ada) Similarities with Modulus-2(just kidding). .)
: I don't think it will ever really gain in popularity, more than it has.
: Developers are pushing toward a system with a more pure object oriented
: environment than ada can offer. I.E. Smalltalk. Which is where I would
: put money the industry will move. Not necessarly Smalltalk but some
: dirivative. I am certain to catch hell for this from some ada devote's,
: but for what ada was supposed to do, no one can deny it got off to a
: bad start.

My big bitch with Ada is that it has historically bad interfaces to commercial libraries for such things as Unix, Motif, Sybase etc. We won't even talk about how bad Windows bindings are. So, for developement using these types of products, Ada stinks and the tools to support developemtn with these products (if they exist) are extremely expensive.

For Whats its worth
Chris Krebs Received on Fri Nov 18 1994 - 23:19:47 CET