GhosT078

And despite all that complexity, you make it work very well (I've used GNAT since about 2002).

I think there is a significant difference between choosing to use words (from some language) versus using brackets like {}, () and []. With nested brackets there are often debates over placement and it is usually less clear what scope is being ended by the closing bracket.

I have been using GNAT Studio (previously GNAT Programming Studio or GPS) on Linux for the last 15 years.

An interesting, although incomplete, list.

Ada does. It has been through 5 editions so far and backwards compatibility is always maintained except for some small things that are documented and usually easy to update.

Yes it really was quite good despite all the hate it seems to get in internet comments. I used it for several years. The feature set, particularly config specs and dynamic views, was brilliant. The product was pretty mature and complete 25 years ago. I agree that administration was complicated and performance could be slow if misconfigured. We configured right, it was very intuitive and pleasant to use. IBM has effectively killed it by continuing to charge an excessive premium while adding nothing significant since they bought Rational (for Clearcase, DOORS, Apex etc.)

Look to Ada for “headers” (i.e. specs) done right.

IBM is where good (acquired) software goes to die. RIP Clearcase.

Sane, easily readable syntax and expressive semantics. Easy to learn. Very scalable. Suitability, by design, for low level systems programming, including microcontrollers. Suitability, by design, for large, complex real-time applications. Easy to interface with C and other languages. Available as part of GCC. Stable and ongoing language evolution.

Yes

In my timeline, something 10x better than Rust came along in 1995.

SPARK is a very expressive language for implementing cryptographic applications. It is available for some LLVM targets (e.g. x86-64).