2021-04-20 10:56 GMT+02:00, Laslo Hunhold <d...@frign.de>: > I'm certain the only main reason Ada wasn't picked up is because it was > developed in the military, and the hippies in the FSF didn't like that.
Probably it's a matter of power (no GNU folks in that standard commission) and of taste (Ada never been a hip program, the object oriented rubbish occupied twenty years of GNU and FSF work alone, and GNU traditionally embodies an important Lisp community). > Another problem is a lack of compiler diversity, but don't we also have > that with C? And other than C, which becomes infested with > GNU-extensions on a massive scale, Ada is still developed by consortium > and relatively safe from that. Imho there is good fragmentation and bad fragmentation, compiler diversity ends up with creating a corporation or a foundation or a political body to control it and then it's bad fragmentation.
