xmlgraphics-fop-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carlos Araya <car...@cvc.edu>
Subject Re: HELP DRIVER!
Date Wed, 16 Jan 2002 22:40:04 GMT
Robert:

It may be so, Ada may indeed be 1000% more robust than Java, however this
being an open source development effort I question your proclamation that
everything should switch to Ada on 3 levels:

1. How many Ada programmers do you know who have the time commitment and
dedication to stay with an open source project. If I remember correctly the
few Ada programmers I know are booked solid for the next couple years.

2. How serious are you about retraining all the developers who contribute
code to FOP (starting with the original developer who still has commit
privileges) in a language who, for many, is an unknown. It's easier to
demand a better language and more and more stuff but we also need to
remember that these folks are doing it for free, on their own time.

3. What compilers currently available as open source can compile ADA as a
cross platform product like Java's bytecode? If there are any (I'm only
familiar with ADA through people who work with it) are they deployed as
widely as the JDK/JRE is for Java?

If it's that important to you that the code is written in Ada, go ahead, get
the source and translate it, then come show us how wrong we were. Until then
I honestly don't think it should change... It's not just an exercise on how
powerful the underlying language is but on how many people uses it

And, with all due respect, What on earth do the 777 and the french railroad
have to do with this discussion?

Carlos

On 01/16/02 14:20, "Robert C. Leif, Ph.D." <rleif@rleif.com> wrote:

> From: Bob Leif,
> To: James Richardson
> I am dead serious. Evidently, you have had no experience with Ada 95.
> Ada is much better at modeling XML than Java. I realize that Java is a
> marketing success. Unfortunately, it is based to a great extent on
> obsolete technology. For instance, it lacks: generics (templates),
> enumerated types, and range checking. Ada is also safe enough for the
> Boeing 777 flight control system and the French railroads.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Richardson [mailto:james.richardson@db.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 9:38 AM
> To: fop-user@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: HELP DRIVER!
> 
> Robert C. Leif, Ph.D. wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: Bob Leif,
>> It seems that the Java underlying FOP is a source of a significant
>> number of problems. I would suggest that the developers switch to a
> much
>> more reliable and efficient object oriented technology, Ada. Since Ada
>> is an ISO standard and has an extensive validation suite, it is much
>> more portable than Java. The GNAT (GNU) Ada compiler can produce both
> J
>> codes and fully compiled executables.
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, is it April already?
> 
> 

-- 
Carlos E. Araya
---+ WebCT Administrator/Trainer
 P | California Virtual Campus
 - | C/O De Anza College
 G | 21250 Stevens Creek Blvd
---+ Cupertino, CA 95014

email               carlos@cvc.edu
web                 http://www.cvc1.org/ (work)
                    http://www.silverwolf-net.net (personal)
phone               408 257 0420 (work)
PGP Fingerprint:    E629 5DFD 7EAE 4995 E9D7  3D2F 5A9F 0CE7 DFE7 1756

Paradoxically, a refusal to 'put a monetary value on life' means that life
is often undervalued.
-- Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach



Mime
View raw message