Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Why did Ada fail?

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-10 6:11

The recent thread about alternatives to C got me thinking. Why did Ada never catch on? It seems to be in every way the superior of Java, Sepples, and other ENTERPRISE evolutions of C. It is probably the safest language in existence, and almost documents itself. If I recall correctly it is also relatively fast.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-10 19:18

>>27
Languages ride a meme-wave to fame, usually.

Lisp rose and fell with the AI industry.

C came along Unix, Unix came along minicomputers, and both actually filled a niche.

C++ came to be from the OO craze and the mess of C code everyone got themselves into.

Java came from people realizing their mistake in going with Sepples coupled with Sun's ample publicity campaign.

Javascript is only heard of because the Web is stuck with it.

PHP rose to popularity due to the faults of the CGI tools of the time, and now it's a magnet for retards, for which there will always be a market.

Perl, inheriting its hype from Unix, created a market for both FIOC and Ruby, and was displaced by both after people grew weary of its bullshit.

Ada actually had its wave of hype, but it sank before it reached the shore. See this newsgroup posting: https://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ada/msg/934d6ce5bca490c4?hl=en

Maybe it could be hyped again now that people have their eyes on concurrency and type safety, having both being priorities in Ada's design. It's very of old-fashioned (and more cumbersome than it'd need to be today) at both, though.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List