4 ms·
I don't know much about Ada but it seems like Rust vs. Ada is perhaps the more salient question than Rust vs. C++. Why was Ada not good enough in terms of a ver
by a8da6b0c91d 12y ago
I don't know much about Ada but it seems like Rust vs. Ada is perhaps the more salient question than Rust vs. C++. Why was Ada not good enough in terms of a very "safe" language?
- Dewie 12y agoIsn't Ada geared more towards runtime assertions of correctness of programs (contracts and such) rather than ensuring memory safety? Can you statically guarantee memory safety in Ada when using manual memory management? It seems that one can choose to both use runtime assertions and static proofs of correctness proofs in Spark. But I don't know if that extends to statically ensuring memory safety in low-level code.
- pjmlp 12y agoAda was good enough, but it suffers from a bad reputation. On the early days it was deemed too complex to implement, although I would say C++ became even more complex. The companies that sold Ada compilers had customers with deep pockets, so Ada compilers were too expensive and required worksations to be used properly. When affordable Ada compilers became available, not many cared about it. Nowadays it has found its place where human lifes are at risk. Many avionic systems, train control systems, hospital devices are coded in Ada. I do attend FOSDEM regularly and also get the feeling its use is increasing in Europe thanks to the security exploits in languages tainted by C compatibility.
- pcwalton 12y agoAda doesn't have the same memory safety guarantees when using uniquely-owned data.