Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 11th Dec 2005 19:23 UTC
General Development Derek M. Jones looks at low-level coding errors and the use of coding guidelines as a cost-effective means of avoiding some of the more common instances of such errors.
Thread beginning with comment 71280
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Re:STTS
by mounty on Mon 12th Dec 2005 11:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Re:STTS"
mounty
Member since:
2005-12-12

> Ada -- much, MUCH better!

Much better for what purposes? To control a plane or a train, probably.

To write a GUI, I do not think so.


Why do you not think so ? How much have you actually thought about it ?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Re:STTS
by corentin on Mon 12th Dec 2005 14:17 in reply to "RE[2]: Re:STTS"
corentin Member since:
2005-08-08

> Why do you not think so ? How much have you actually thought about it ?

How many (native) GUI libraries/frameworks are there targetting ADA?

It is not that you can not write a GUI application with ADA (you could probably write a decent GUI app using FORTRAN or COBOL, given enough time and drug). It is just that it was not designed for such a task; there are much better alternatives out there (C++, C#, Delphi or Java).

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Re:STTS
by mounty on Mon 12th Dec 2005 18:01 in reply to "RE[3]: Re:STTS"
mounty Member since:
2005-12-12

With respect, it seems to me that you do not know Ada very well, including how to spell it.

Ada has better facilities for interfacing to non-native APIs than most languages, including representation clauses and foreign calling conventions, defined by the language.

The area of application for Ada is anywhere where reliable and maintainable software is required.

Having said that, I love C++. It has enabled me to make a very good living as a contract programmer, sorting out the messes created by others.

Reply Parent Score: 1