Content deleted Content added
→maybe because there noting wrong worth mentioning: it's all history now. |
Prosfilaes (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 379:
:: Well maybe I can still fit something into the history section why Ada had slow to start and was never quite able to acquire the critical mass to become a "mass-market" programming language. --[[User:Krischik|Krischik]] <sup>[[User_talk:Krischik|T]]</sup> 07:24, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
::[http://gsyc.escet.urjc.es/~jjamor/research/magazines/2005-upgrade-amor-barahona-robles-herraiz.pdf] gives lines of code in Debian 3.1. Ada is the 11th most common language. Given the number of languages around since Ada was created and in use when Ada was created, I don't see the question as why it's NOT widely used today; the question is why is it so widely used when so many other languages have bit the dust? Sadly enough, the answers are just as arbitrary one way as the other in many ways; Ada is not used because C (and C++ and then Java) and Unix won for various reasons, ranging from the arbitrary (AT&T's legal woes) to the historical (once C and Unix got a foot in the door, C++ was easy to switch to, then Java), to the value-based. On the other hand, why is Ada thriving and [[Modula-3]] dead? Because the DoD thrived and pushed their language and DEC died.
::In summary, the mere claim that Ada is not widely used today is biased by a demand that to be widely used, you have to be one of a dozen top-dogs. To ask why it's not one of those languages is the wrong question; the real question should be "why is it where it is?", which at some point drags in the life and death of at least a dozen unrelated languages and operating systems.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] ([[User talk:Prosfilaes|talk]]) 15:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
| |||