Is Ada too big? A designer answers the critics

Authors:
Brian A. Wichmann
Affiliations:
National Physical Laboratory, Middlesex, UK
Venue:
Communications of the ACM
Year:
1984

Citing 4
Cited 8

Scaling down Ada (or towards a standard Ada subset)

Communications of the ACM
The Ada compiler validation capability

SIGPLAN '80 Proceedings of the ACM-SIGPLAN symposium on Ada programming language
The NYU Ada translator and interpreter

SIGPLAN '80 Proceedings of the ACM-SIGPLAN symposium on Ada programming language
Rationale for the design of the Ada programming language

ACM SIGPLAN Notices - Rationale for the deisgn of the Ada programming language

Paradigms for design and implementation in ADA

Communications of the ACM
Why Ada is not just another programming language

Communications of the ACM
Ada in CS1

SIGCSE '89 Proceedings of the twentieth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education
Some relational query language design issues and the language MQL

CSC '86 Proceedings of the 1986 ACM fourteenth annual conference on Computer science
ACM forum: letters

Communications of the ACM
Splitting the Difference: The Historical Necessity of Synthesis in Software Engineering

IEEE Annals of the History of Computing
A critique of common LISP

LFP '84 Proceedings of the 1984 ACM Symposium on LISP and functional programming
Simple tools to learn Ada

ACM SIGAda Ada Letters

Quantified Score

Hi-index	48.26

Visualization

Abstract

Many have criticized the Department of Defense's new computer language, Ada, saying it is too large, too complicated, or too difficult to use. Are they right? And are there some simplifications that could be made to Ada without destroying its usefulness?