When I was reading I was thinking - if you like that kind of grammar just use Ada. And then later down he specifically mentions Ada. So - why not just use that?

When I was reading I was thinking - if you like that kind of grammar just use Ada. And then later down he specifically mentions Ada. So - why not just use that? With Ada, it is straightforward to create the kind of tight, fast code you'd write in C. You can control your own garbage collection and it has a fabulous type system. And - unless you need templates - it can do pretty much everything C++ can do as well. I don't use Ada due to its verbosity. That's makes refactoring hard, and I refactor constantly. But only yesterday I picked up my copy of _Concurrency in Ada_ and flicked through to look at some ideas. There's lots of good stuff in there. I guess at the back story - a team who have spent years with difficult enterprise problems, who have thought really hard about them, and then rolled their conclusions back into the platform. In the near future, a language called "flash" or "rock" or "bourne" will hit the hn frontpage. People will be amazed by its bootstrap website, its features, and will compare it well to Go. It'll get a whole lot of momentum. Weeks later a greybeard will publish an article, "Rock vs Brand X". The author of Rock will come clean in the comments saying that Rock is just a syntax transform that feeds to gnatmake, and that the whole thing was an April Fools joke.