Em 01-07-2014 15:59, Bruce Dubbs escreveu: > Pierre Labastie wrote: > >> Concerning Ada, it is really different: the package is mature, Ada is >> used by some category of persons (in aerospace industry at least), and >> it does not add any new dependencies, so I think we may have it in the >> book. > > Ada was designed for the US Department of Defense, supposedly for > reliability when coding. I did spend many years for the Air Force > writing and maintaining code, but never had to use Ada directly. I did > study it a bit and examined some code written with it. > > I can say for a fact that really bad code can be written in Ada (or any > language). It's not the language, it's the programmer. It's also very > hard to get code to compile due to extremely strict type checking. > > Other than military use, where it is mandated for some applications, I > don't know of many that use it. > > http://www.seas.gwu.edu/~mfeldman/ada-project-summary.html > > To me, the highest reliability requirement was for the Mars Curiosity > landing craft and that was 2.5 million lines of C. > > All that said, if you have it ready, I have no objections to having it > in the book.
Having a page for Ada simplifies the gcc page, therefore is positive for the users, exactly because they will not want Ada, more often. On the contrary, it would make more difficult for developers to update gcc, because then Ada needs to be updated, as well, which is like having a new difficult package in the book. And the user with doubts can get help in support. -- []s, Fernando -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
