4 ms·

If Adacore had published a full featured free compiler for students/universities by the time Ada 95 standard was published, I am sure that Ada could have occupi

If Adacore had published a full featured free compiler for students/universities by the time Ada 95 standard was published, I am sure that Ada could have occupied the space C++ takes today. Mostly what Ada lacks is not the features but the comunity effect, we saw that when comparing feature parity with C++ and we see that again when comparing feature parity with Rust. There are a lot of briliant features and tooling in Ada, but unless there is a community effect (or a gigantic industry sponsor e.g. golang) it is difficult to convince people to switch over. I can't remember who said it so I will paraphrase, the best language/target to program in is whatever your friends/colleagues are using.

thesuperbigfrog 4y ago
>> If Adacore had published a full featured free compiler for students/universities by the time Ada 95 standard was published, I am sure that Ada could have occupied the space C++ takes today. Agreed. If there had been more free (gratis) or low-cost Ada compilers at that time Ada would be far less niche than it is today. There is increased interest in Ada today thanks to Rust. There is also interplay between Rust and Ada/SPARK features with Rust getting some Ada features and SPARK getting some Rust features. Ferrous Systems is working with AdaCore on the Ferrocene Language Specification to formally document the Rust subset that Ferrocene will use: https://ferrous-systems.com/ferrocene/ https://ferrous-systems.com/ferrocene/ https://ferrous-systems.com/blog/ferrocene-language-specification/ https://ferrous-systems.com/blog/ferrocene-language-specific... It is exciting to see Rust mature so it can one day be used in safety-critical work.
- the_only_law 4y ago
  This seems to be a common theme among certain languages, software, etc. from the 90s. I've heard similar things about Smalltalk.
  - igouy 4y ago
    Long before the digital era that common theme would have been expressed as — Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
toolslive 4y ago
Yup, also the commercial ADA IDEs were brilliant, even compared to Borland, but o-so-expensive.
augustk 4y ago
> If Adacore had published a full featured free compiler for students/universities by the time Ada 95 standard was published, I am sure that Ada could have occupied the space C++ takes today. The same can be said about Eiffel.
- benibela 4y ago
  Or Delphi
ajxs 4y ago
> If Adacore had published a full featured free compiler for students/universities by the time Ada 95... Didn't they? I wasn't around then, so I'm working with what information I can find online. According to Wikipedia it was fully validated in 1995[1], and I'm pretty sure it was always a free compiler based on GCC. I think the dust had settled on the battlefield of the language wars long before Ada 95. It was/is still common for European universities to teach Ada as part of the computer science curriculum. That still hasn't managed to give Ada the industry presence it deserves. In my opinion it's by far the superior language. It's just losing out for human reasons. > ...gigantic industry sponsor e.g. golang... It had the biggest industry sponsor at one stage: The US Department of Defense. Back in the late 70s, and early 80s when the DoD was directly sponsoring Ada's development, they had incredibly deep pockets. I'd say this is why Ada is so comprehensive today. They had the money, and motivation to design the language by committee down to the most minor details. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT
- erik_seaberg 4y ago
  Ada 83 had long had a reputation for stunningly high prices when my first job chose C++ in 1992 (when templates were pretty new and sort-of worked).
  - ajxs 4y ago
    I guess that prior to the FSF releasing GNAT, and the DoD dropping its Ada mandate, compiler vendors had a captive audience, and could charge a serious premium for their software. I've read that the hardware required to use an Ada compiler was far more expensive than its competitors as well. I've heard more than one person say that this was a serious barrier to its adoption in the wider industry.

thesuperbigfrog 4y ago

>> If Adacore had published a full featured free compiler for students/universities by the time Ada 95 standard was published, I am sure that Ada could have occupied the space C++ takes today. Agreed. If there had been more free (gratis) or low-cost Ada compilers at that time Ada would be far less niche than it is today. There is increased interest in Ada today thanks to Rust. There is also interplay between Rust and Ada/SPARK features with Rust getting some Ada features and SPARK getting some Rust features. Ferrous Systems is working with AdaCore on the Ferrocene Language Specification to formally document the Rust subset that Ferrocene will use: https://ferrous-systems.com/ferrocene/ https://ferrous-systems.com/ferrocene/ https://ferrous-systems.com/blog/ferrocene-language-specification/ https://ferrous-systems.com/blog/ferrocene-language-specific... It is exciting to see Rust mature so it can one day be used in safety-critical work.

the_only_law 4y ago
This seems to be a common theme among certain languages, software, etc. from the 90s. I've heard similar things about Smalltalk.
- igouy 4y ago
  Long before the digital era that common theme would have been expressed as — Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

toolslive 4y ago

Yup, also the commercial ADA IDEs were brilliant, even compared to Borland, but o-so-expensive.

augustk 4y ago

> If Adacore had published a full featured free compiler for students/universities by the time Ada 95 standard was published, I am sure that Ada could have occupied the space C++ takes today. The same can be said about Eiffel.

benibela 4y ago
Or Delphi

ajxs 4y ago

> If Adacore had published a full featured free compiler for students/universities by the time Ada 95... Didn't they? I wasn't around then, so I'm working with what information I can find online. According to Wikipedia it was fully validated in 1995[1], and I'm pretty sure it was always a free compiler based on GCC. I think the dust had settled on the battlefield of the language wars long before Ada 95. It was/is still common for European universities to teach Ada as part of the computer science curriculum. That still hasn't managed to give Ada the industry presence it deserves. In my opinion it's by far the superior language. It's just losing out for human reasons. > ...gigantic industry sponsor e.g. golang... It had the biggest industry sponsor at one stage: The US Department of Defense. Back in the late 70s, and early 80s when the DoD was directly sponsoring Ada's development, they had incredibly deep pockets. I'd say this is why Ada is so comprehensive today. They had the money, and motivation to design the language by committee down to the most minor details. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT

erik_seaberg 4y ago
Ada 83 had long had a reputation for stunningly high prices when my first job chose C++ in 1992 (when templates were pretty new and sort-of worked).
- ajxs 4y ago
  I guess that prior to the FSF releasing GNAT, and the DoD dropping its Ada mandate, compiler vendors had a captive audience, and could charge a serious premium for their software. I've read that the hardware required to use an Ada compiler was far more expensive than its competitors as well. I've heard more than one person say that this was a serious barrier to its adoption in the wider industry.