home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: qualcomm.com!usenet
- From: nabbasi@qualcomm.com (Nasser Abbasi)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada
- Date: 6 Feb 1996 19:51:19 GMT
- Organization: QUALCOMM
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <4f8bfn$oct@qualcomm.com>
- References: <00001a73+00002504@msn.com> <4etcmm$lpd@nova.dimensional.com> <3114d8fb.5a455349@zesi.ruhr.de> <4f85h4$cml@hacgate2.hac.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: nabbasi.qualcomm.com
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.93.14
-
- In article <4f85h4$cml@hacgate2.hac.com>, collins@thor.tu.hac.com says...
- >
- >I really don't care how good Ada is. If I can't find it, or my company
- >can't afford it, it's totally useless to me.
- >
-
- GNAT is free.
-
- Anyway, I think the reason commerical companies do not use Ada as much is
- not really due to the cost of the compilers. It is the fact that once a
- company starts using one langauge (say C++) there is a large inertia
- behind this. It will become difficult to have the company switch
- from using one language to another once they have written allot of
- their software in one language. Programmers get used to using one
- language, using support tools for that language, you have training
- courses, skill base is build in one language, and then no manager will
- want to risk (or be brave enough) or take a chance in trying something
- new.
-
- Even many lazy programmers do not want to try something new. A programmer
- becomes comfertable with one language, they sort of know it enough
- to do their job, then go home and watch football TV , and they do not
- want to learn something new.
-
-
- Nasser
-
-