TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"(No Name Available)" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 10 Oct 1998 14:39:57 EDT
Content-transfer-encoding:
7bit
Content-type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
[log in to unmask] (Dale Stanbrough) wrote:

>* Privacy is based on the location of an item in a package, rather than
>  on a per item basis, which results in contortions to achieve various
>  coding styles.
>
>* Lack of freely available garbage collector for implementations.
>  This really restricts the coding style to assuming that there is no
>  garbage collector.



>Not specifically Ada language...
>
>* Lack of bindings
>
>* Lack of interest by students.
>  Curiously many students quite like Ada, and find it easy to get things done
>  in it, but still see no future in it.

It seems to me the garbage collector issue really belongs in the lower
category.  The language allows any sort of implementation, just as it
allows inclusion of one annex or another.  It would appear that the lack
of garbage collection is an issue of market demand, even if the currency
of the "market" is admiration of one's peers for having provided a free
version.

Larry Kilgallen

ATOM RSS1 RSS2