1. 45
  1.  

  2. [Comment from banned user removed]

    1. 18

      Ryan Levick, Principal Cloud Developer Advocate

      Sorry, knowing Ryan personally, and he’s a kick-ass programmer. He’s also a kick-ass community organiser and is super good at deciding his path through the programming world.

      Ad hominem attacks of that kind are really not what I want to see in this community.

      1. 12

        Your rant, full of exaggerations, is unwarranted and doesn’t help to have a reasoned discussion about this.

        I’m not Ada expert, but as far as I can tell, the “why” mentioned in the post applies also to Ada. Other languages rely on garbage collector or reference counting to guarantee memory safety. AFAIK Ada is just looking at adapting the ownership model: https://blog.adacore.com/using-pointers-in-spark

        1. 1

          Ugly ad hominem aside, they do have a point, though. Ada is not mentioned once in this article (and neither is D.) When an article on “Why X is the best of subset A” simply fails to mention multiple major members of subset A, one starts to get the sense that the author never was interested in an objective analysis and comparison of the available options, but rather had decided ahead of time what they wanted to support, and just looked for reasons to do so.

          1. 3

            They’ve said:

            Languages which achieve memory safety through garbage collection are not ideal choices for systems programming because their runtimes can lead to unpredictable performance and unnecessary overhead.

            This doesn’t require listing all of the languages that are disqualified this way.

            D’s -betterC is better than C, but doesn’t offer the safety guarantees they’re looking for.

            1. 0

              Of course not, but it still does not diqualify Ada.

              1. 3

                This article is not comparative writing, nor does it document a whole process. So there’s absolutely no need to consider Ada in this post.

                Also, I’m pretty sure that Microsoft had ample exposure to Ada before, especially given the amount of research they pour into programming languages, especially in the UK.

        2. 10

          Ada has downsides as well. For example, there is no (widely used) package manager.

          Ultimately, it depends on the use case. If you program a real-time safety-critical micro controller then Ada wins over Rust easily. If you develop cloud back end stuff then Rust wins over Ada.

          Over time a lot things can be fixed. Rust is in a positive growth spiral and it will improve. For Ada, I’m not sure if the community is growing or shrinking.

          1. 7

            Over time a lot things can be fixed. Rust is in a positive growth spiral and it will improve. For Ada, I’m not sure if the community is growing or shrinking.

            There’s quite some people in the Ada community that see Rust as a chance of breaking up the status quo and put them on the table again. From my point of view, I’m very happy about that, user choice is a benefit at a grand scale.

          2. 2

            I wish languages and other software technologies could die. I mean proper deaths, with funeral and a memorial, and a clear consensus that it will never be used for anything again. That we could be fully released from the technology, never having to consider it again.