Does anyone else recall that the animation/graphics for the
movie Jurassic Park was written in Ada?
I seem to recall reading an article that said they originally
wrote it in C++, but it was taking 30% of the CPU. They
re-wrote it in Ada and it only took 3% of the CPU. I also
seem to recall that it was done by a group at Silicon
Graphics on their workstations.
They was a pretty good App, but nobody seemed to
notice it was Ada.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Sparks [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 11:13 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Ada RTOS.
> Robin Reagan wrote:
> > The "high level of support" is where the money can be made (See ACT).
> I am assuming you are referring to the fact that ACT is not cheap. I see
> as a dual edged sword. The high cost can real turn people off.
> > The support I have been getting from WindRiver is good technically but
> is not
> > what I consider in a timely manner.
> Amen to that!
> > The "Killer app" part is unimportant. What is important is showing
> > (the non-Ada community) that Ada can compete where it counts. If we
> > show that Ada can compete in the area that is was designed for we have
> > hope in other areas.
> I disagree. Ada can compete anywhere, whether it was designed for
> embedded software or not. I convinced a down in the trenches C/C++
> teacher in college when I did my graphics class that Ada really can do
> graphics! He didn't think it was possible. I was even going against the
> odds since I didn't have much in the way of supporting graphical libraries
> to reuse.
> > The problem with Linux is the GPL. I work in an area that giving away
> > source
> > would not be acceptable to my employer (And I agree with this). Is there
> > RT/embedded BSD?
> This giving away code or not giving away code is going to be a thorn.
> we all benefit from free software, however, some of us like to earn money.
> Call me crazy, however, I would hate to see my hard efforts go to a pirate
> who makes money off my labor. There may be some pieces of software
> that is truly deserving of being free because of its common application or
> lack of marketability. These I don't have a problem with. The other
> of software, well, needs to be determined if it is a give away or some
> form of licensing.
> Chris Sparks