From:  Stanley Allen <[log in to unmask]>
Date:          Tue, 14 Apr 1998 22:08:42 -0500
Subject:       Re: Embedded Systems Programming Magazine

>
> That's too bad.  In terms of the size of the markets,
> "Safety critical systems" represent approximately the
> same percentage of the "real-time and embedded systems"
> pie chart that "real-time and embedded systems"
> represent in the general computer systems pie chart.
> It's a niche within a niche.  Now, we all know that
> Ada is destined to be a niche language.  The large
> market of computer software including word processors,
> games, web browsers, HTML generators, etc., is
> probably generally closed, fairly or not, to Ada
> technology.  Within the "real-time and embedded
> systems" markets, however, it's not a good idea to
> limit ourselves to "safety critical" only.  And this
> ad from Aonix will have an unfortunate market-
> limiting effect.


Another one that I've noticed is the truism that Ada is supposed to be
good for programming in the large, or the humongous, or whatever.  I've
heard this in several different forms, along the lines of "C++ is good
for projects up to a million lines of code or so, but beyond that you
need Ada."

This theme is repeated by Ada apologists and vendors in the same voice
or with the same motivations as the "reliability" theme, and with the
same effects.  It's also repeated by those who wish to sound
even-handed, or as a concession -- a charitable way of saying "that
language must have some reason to exist -- maybe it's 'programming in
the large'...").

In any case, it makes it sound as though there is some penalty for
using Ada that dominates in small or medium-sized projects, and that
the benefits do not emerge until you reach the level of "way huge
program".