TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Reply To:
Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:53:42 +0200
text/plain (34 lines)
-- Jeffrey Carter:
--  I don't see a need for an AVM. However, a JVM implementation in Ada,
--  open source and free in both senses, might be a worthwhile project if
--  anyone cares to undertake it.

I could not agree more. With HW support for kJava (see fx. ARM Jazelle =>
E0003620BE?OpenDocument&style=CPUs) there is no need for another MeToo
technology. What is hot these days in R&D labs for mobile computing:

* product-lines, generative programming
  (see fx. Aspects =>,
  Jakata/GenVoca => etc.)
* architecture frameworks & quality issues
  (see fx. Holt =>,
  Bosch => for links)
* Java support

Programming wise it also back to the "Basics" as C++ has failed to deliver
the promise. Basics is unfortunately in most cases to C! With 0.5-1.5M SLOC
in most mobile (handheld) units these days complexity is a major concern.
Ada is ideally suited for that job.

In my opinion Ada 0x revision should try to support some of the emerging
design/language topics like "aspects" - i.e. less emphasis on pure OO as an
salvage for everything - to get Ada back as a topspot language where it
really belongs. 

regards  /søren
Søren Henssel-Rasmussen
Nokia Mobile Phones, R&D Copenhagen