TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
"W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
Mon, 9 Nov 1998 09:10:47 -0500
"W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (32 lines)
>  ..... Since we wish to achieve an object oriented
>  design C++ sounds like the natural choice although Fortran
>  is very popular in numerical software.
>  However, I personally find C++ a very difficult and unsafe
>  language to use for such a large project and I think that
>  Ada 95 would be an excellent choice for this task. Still,
>  it is difficult for me to persuade people mainly because
>  there seems to be no experience in CFD with Ada and most
>  companies are moving to C++.

"Most companies?"  Why copy your competitors' mistakes?  I
suspect it may not be true any more--Java has taken a lot of
the hot air^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hwind out of the sails of C++.
And Eiffel, in spite of poor press (like Ada), keeps going
and going and going....  I'm inclined to prefer Ada over
Eiffel, but then again, I don't have any practical experience
in Eiffel.

I think you owe it to yourselves to take a look at Ada 95.
If you can get to the Team Ada archives, look at the recent
thread comparing Java and Ada.  Then consider that both sides
of that debate agreed that either language is better than C++.

There was also a recent comp.lang.ada discussion on
Fortran vs. Ada.

If you can't get to the archives, I can forward you portions
of the Java/Ada comparison.  I can't help with the newsgroup.

Good luck!