3 ms·

Sounds like Rust, hah.

• cmrdporcupine 6y ago
  In many ways Rust fills part of the conceptual space that Ada was attemptiong to fill. Both are very concerned with safety. Except Ada was military/government mandated, and the syntax is probably the opposite of Rust: very verbose, very wordy. And the concept of type inference is anathema to the Ada mindset, where everything is explicitly... explicit. I've never used Ada for work but I went through a couple years where I enjoyed playing with the language as a sort of C++ alternative. I ... kind of? like it, but then I learned Pascal and Modula-2 before I ever learned C, so...
  • sheepybloke 6y ago
    One of the nice things about the verbosity is that it's really easy to read. I've been working with code from the late 90's for some aircraft and it makes it really easy to review and get into the code (when well-written). The other thing is that the strong types are really powerful. If Ada compiles, then the only things that you have to worry about is if your logic is right or if you remembered to init an array.
  • OnlyOneCannolo 6y ago
    Also, whereas Ada is perfectly fine with introducing runtime overhead, Rust takes a zero runtime cost approach when possible, otherwise it doesn't offer that feature as part of the language.