> Skweetis wrote:
> I don't use Ada because there aren't very many library bindings
> for it.
> Finally a criticism that isn't completely false.
> Microsoft/Sun/SGI/etc has legions of programmers and are constantly
> defining new APIs. Everyone else will always be one step behind.
Unfortunately, this is very true. Building a system with COTS hardware
requires a fairly large resource expenditure on creating binding for the
included C/C++ libraries. This is not just having to deal with new APIs
SGI/etc but with real world, everyday hardware.
> Arrogant-Bastard wrote:
> specifically the design-by-committee approach
> It is a common perception that Ada was designed by committee and is
> therefore bad. This is just an example of how people make up their
> minds first and justify their opinions later. Facts don't matter to
> people, only opinion matters.
I have always found this particularly funny when espoused by a C++ advocate.
The look on their face when I show them a copy of a report from the AT&T C++
language Committee is priceless. They do not want to comment on C++
enhancements being designed by committee.