Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introduction to Ada

learn.adacore.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 193 posts

Re: Introduction to Ada

#171

Post by dwheeler »

jonathanstrange wrote: post #98
Lucretia9 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Probably mostly due to licensing issues. Yup. See https://www.reddit.com/r/ada/comments/ijwqfl/last_call_on_th... > Ada has a runtime that you basically have to use and the most complete AdaCore version forces you to release executables under GPL. See above. > The FSF version is less complete (many libraries are missing) Incorrect, AdaCore just packages their libs with their version of the compiler, with FSF, you ha…

Thanks for the "corrections". Some of them are fine (I didn't know about the FSF license change) but with some I really don't agree. > Incorrect, AdaCore just packages their libs with their version of the compiler, with FSF, you have to build them yourself, which is a pain. But they are working on that. Various fairly essential libraries maintained by AdaCore are under GPL, so you could not use them for non-GPL softw…

> I've never met any Ada programmer before who thought Ada does not have a relatively long and steep learning curve. You'd be the first I've met.

Make that at least two, I think Ada's pretty easy to learn.

One thing that makes Ada easier is that if you get something wrong, it's usually a syntax error that's caught by the compiler. GNAT's error messages are very good and will often point you the right way. The whole language was designed to try to catch errors at compiler time. Obviously some errors will slip through anyway, but it helps.

Ada does have some features that you have to learn about before you can use them. That's true for any language. E.g., it has a task (thread) system built-in; if you want to use it, you'll need to learn it :-).

Re: Introduction to Ada

#172

Post by zeroc8 »

Lucretia9 wrote: post #111
zeroc8 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I talked to an Ada Core sales guy at Embedded World Nuernberg. He mentioned they have a cheap license now for small companies. 5000 Euros.

When was that? For a company I know who tried to use Ada a while back, that 5K was too expensive even then.

Three or four years ago. He talked about a developer license for small companies.

Re: Introduction to Ada

#173

Post by atombender »

cpeterso wrote: post #150

Does any other programming language use “Ada case” identifiers (mixing uppercase and underscores like "XML_HTTP_Request") instead of camel case ("XMLHTTPRequest" or "XMLHTTPRequest") or snake case ("xml_http_request")? Ada case avoids the ambiguity of lowercasing acronyms or smooshing together of words. (Yes, I know the actual capitalization of my example identifier in JavaScript is "XMLHTTPRequest". That’s what make…

Indeed. It always bugged me that languages like Rust chose snake_case for lowercase identifier, but CamelCase for the rest. Surely it should be Camel_Case.

Re: Introduction to Ada

#174

Post by bitwize »

tester34 wrote: post #114
bitwize wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> their just isn't enough interesting work going on using Ada to warrant investing time in learning the language. You can help change that -- by doing interesting work! The nice thing about open source and self-directed projects is that you can use what you want based on its own merits, and leave bandwagoneering for when you have to find a job.

It sounds like instead of using he right tool to solve the problem, you create the problem to use the tool :o

That's how you determine which problems a tool is good or bad for: try solving problems with it, irrespective of whether it's the right tool.

Re: Introduction to Ada

#175

Post by jhalstead »

WalterBright wrote: post #170
jhalstead wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you remember if the nickname was "Orange Book" or was it "phone book"? I didn't see the former when searching for more information, but the latter was referenced here [0]. If it's actually "phone book", then [1] seems promising. [0] http://www.columbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/pdp10stuff/ [1] http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp10/TOPS10/1972_PDP-10_Us...

It looks like the "Assembly Language Handbook" in the first reference. It was a very thick book, printed on very thin paper like a phone book. I clearly remember it as "Orange Book", after all, it is orange, but that just might have been Caltech vernacular. (Caltech had many local words unheard off campus.) A marvelous find, thanks! I'm glad they haven't all vanished. I'd still like a scan pdf!

Hmm, you may be in luck. That one looks like it's in the parent directory of the second link: http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp10/TOPS10/1973_Assembly_...

Re: Introduction to Ada

#176

Post by WalterBright »

jhalstead wrote: post #175
WalterBright wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like the "Assembly Language Handbook" in the first reference. It was a very thick book, printed on very thin paper like a phone book. I clearly remember it as "Orange Book", after all, it is orange, but that just might have been Caltech vernacular. (Caltech had many local words unheard off campus.) A marvelous find, thanks! I'm glad they haven't all vanished. I'd still like a scan pdf!

Hmm, you may be in luck. That one looks like it's in the parent directory of the second link: http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp10/TOPS10/1973_Assembly_...

Sweet! Nice to see that manual again!

Re: Introduction to Ada

#179

Post by froh »

the_duke wrote: post #61

I'd be very interested in someone with substantial experience in Ada/Spark providing some insight: * Why did Ada not manage to get a significant foothold outside of some small domains? * What's great, what's not so great about it? * How "modern" does the language feel, including the tooling, documentation, etc? Specifically Spark 2014. ( I see a LSP server and VSCode plugin, for example) * Spark2014 seems to be open…

I wonder if ADA and the gnat company have created barriers to entry that prevent a community to form that gets ADA beyond the tipping point.

The gnat and base library license confusion has been discussed in the thread.

In addition to that I'm missing a succinct and to the point introduction to ADA. The signal to noise ratio of the standard "programming in ADA 2012" book was freaking me out. I stopped looking into the language not because the language was hard but because it was explained so poorly.

Re: Introduction to Ada

#180

Post by ithkuil »

ithkuil wrote: post #137
elpatoisthebest wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately in my experience that "only" represents a somewhat large percentage of HR or hiring managers.

Then (after you make sure you learn enough of another language to not embarrass yourself) be a little bit creative in your resume/CV in order to pass that stupid filter.

(by which I don't suggest to lie, rather to make sure you mention you have some experience in popular language even if your primary job didn't use it. E.g. mentioning the side projects that made you learn C++ will let a recruiter tick that box)
Post reply on HN