Do you realize that this report is written in "electronic design", or an embedded systems journal? It's not talking about the PC desktop here.
I don't know the exact numbers but Ada still plays a big role in security critical systems (airplanes etc.).
> Managed languages lead to "applications that are difficult to maintain over time"?
I think this is true regarding to embedded systems because they evolve very fast. Microsoft would have to take much effort to be on par, for many different kinds of embedded systems. The second point is that Microsoft's support for their operating systems is not unlimited. So if you have a long lasting embedded system technology then you simply cannot afford to use .NET.
ADA did. It didn't as of new projects around 2002 - people had moved to cheaper bundled platforms rather than the traditional compiler vendors I.e. MIPS/PPC FPGA core plus vendor C compiler. Older kit still uses it AFAIK but you won't see much if any recent software shipping in it.
I quit embedded in about 2005. I dealt with avionics and guidance systems. They don't evolve fast. When I quit, people were still using RCA1802 cores and ASM for some tasks.
.net on windows CE is still out there in force and is well supported. There are literally millions of devices out there with 20 year support contracts on them.
Do you realize that this report is written in "electronic design", or an embedded systems journal? It's not talking about the PC desktop here.
I don't know the exact numbers but Ada still plays a big role in security critical systems (airplanes etc.).
Is there a renascence of C++ and ada in those domains? That is to say did they ever leave. I don't remember hearing about a big push to have embedded software for airplane controls written in C#.
Do you realize that this report is written in "electronic design", or an embedded systems journal? It's not talking about the PC desktop here.
I don't know the exact numbers but Ada still plays a big role in security critical systems (airplanes etc.).
> Managed languages lead to "applications that are difficult to maintain over time"?
I think this is true regarding to embedded systems because they evolve very fast. Microsoft would have to take much effort to be on par, for many different kinds of embedded systems. The second point is that Microsoft's support for their operating systems is not unlimited. So if you have a long lasting embedded system technology then you simply cannot afford to use .NET.