> >Alexander Kopilovitch wrote:
> >Certainly, for you, as a participant of the Ada Marketing, it would be
> >if Ada language becomes widespread.
> > But I cannot understand the majority of Ada-Teamers who permanently and
> >loudly dream about the times when Ada will be used more often then C/C++
> >even Visual Basic. Do they really want to test Ada language immunity
> >the wild forces of non-restricted world?
> Why not, Delphi (Object Pascal) did it? The languages are very similar.
> I think
> Ada would fair quite well in that arena. Most people won't understand the
> of strong typing adn Ada until it rescues them from a loosely typed
> > Do they want a Microsoft Ada.
> I'm not sure that would be so bad.
> > (with Microsoft-only extensions)?
> Nobody wants that.
> >Do they want "Ada for Dummies" and "Ada in 21 Day"
> >books to be published? ...Perhaps, I missed something important, looking
> >all those discussions from my Pluto.
> What I miss is the richness of tools. We have to get Ada vendors to
> become more visionary.
> Their tools need to be as progressive as Delphi. On top of that, Delphi
> is porting it's tool
> suite to Linux, and there's no comparable Ada products. Delphi is
> acknowledged as the
> premier Windows development tool, and once they port to Linux they will,
> hopefully, have
> a multi-platform development tool, that will look the same on both
> platforms, making it
> extremely appealing.
> When I talked to certain Ada vendors (which I won't name) about their
> views on Linux, they
> told me they didn't feel the market was there. They had made a
> significant investment in
> Windows and didn't want to stretch to a market that wouldn't give them a
> good return. But
> this is typical of the backwards thinking Ada vendors, and industry. Like
> I told this vendor,
> there was no demand for Delphi until the tool was created. When people
> saw what it could
> do, it became a "hot" item. The Ada industry, especially the vendors,
> seem content to let
> VC++ and Delphi lead the way and then react to it by developing bindings.
> The problem with
> this approach is you are always in a trailing position, and always at
> least one step behind.
> Many times, you have to go out and buy the other tool to be able to do Ada
> applications with
> that technology. If I have to do that, then why buy Ada at all. As long
> as the Ada vendors
> keep this attitude, and we the users allow it, it will surely lead to the
> death of the language,
> except maybe for embedded systems.
> They also told me they already have a great GUI builder for Unix, which
> has been ported to Linux.
> And it would "blow away" anything like Delphi. So, why didn't the port
> that development tool to
> Windows? Instead they have two different products that don't function the
> Is it too much to dream that I could learn one language and one tool that
> would allow me
> to develop a GUI interface that will run on any platform I choose? Yeah,
> I know it's called
> JAVA, but that's just a prettier version of an ugly and cryptic language
> called C/C++. Ada
> has the power and potential, but will it ever happen?
> I'm hoping Microsoft will come out with a Visual Ada. That is our only
> hope, because
> despite the fact that Delphi is the best Windows development tool, it is
> still struggling because
> it's not a Microsoft product. If Microsoft would develop an Ada tool,
> they could automatically
> take the necessary steps to integrate it with their other products, as
> they do with Visual Basic
> and VC++. They could also automatically entrench it in to the MFC
> classes, as they do with
> VC++. If they develop an Ada tool, you know they will try to make it
> Windows specific. They
> do that by default, which could one day lead to their downfall. But it
> wouldn't matter because
> you don't have to use MFCs. There are C++ developers here that don't use
> the MFC, so that
> their code will run on Windows and Unix. Except that there is a C++
> vendor that has ported
> the MFC to Unix already. VC++ and Delphi are already taking steps that
> Ada should have
> years ago.
> I'm sorry I'm venting this frustration. I'm just tired of Ada being
> behind the curve, with their
> development tools being inferior to Microsoft and Delphi. I'm very pro
> Ada, but I'm tired of
> defending a losing situation. It's a superior language with inferior
> tools. And the writing is
> on the wall unless we do something about it. There is no reason Delphi
> couldn't have been
> written in Ada instead of Object Pascal. One particular vendor still
> holds the view that if
> someone will fund the effort then they will do it. Well who funded
> Delphi? It created it's
> own market. Why can't Ada vendors do the same thing. How can we pressure
> even though, it shouldn't be our responsibility? How could we get
> Microsoft to develop an
> Ada product?
> >Alexander Kopilovitch [log in to unmask]
> Frank Beard
> SPAWAR Washington