> My bias is toward Ada, because just by actually studying Java, my
> _subjective_ opinion is that it is much better than C or C++ but not as
> good as Ada.  My point was that in terms of advocacy, the Jones' letter
> might encourage people to get away from C--but they are already doing
> that; they're going to Java.  At present, not only is Java Ada's biggest
> competition, it's also competing for the same _reasons_: portability,
> standardization, reliability, ...

I disagree with the standardization and reliability [actually stability].  The
are no standards outside of what Sun defines [and what others redefine].  Ada
has the upper hand in this respect.  The issue of stability is the relatively
fast pace that new version come out.  This is necessary to implement fixes in
the design and also add new features.  Unfortunately, in the commercial world
support for the current version x.x.x of Java lags the release by 6-12 months.

Ada may be revised and added to, but it is in a more orderly and "deliberative"
fashion.  This make for a more stable development environment.

> So empirical evidence comparing Java with Ada is far more valuable now
> than repeating the well-known (and well-ignored) evidence of Ada's
> superiority over C.


Phil Johnson