Since Broadcom took over Arduino, maybe there is a certain window of opportunity to convince people to migrate to the ADA ecosystem. Personally I think ADA is even easier to learn than the stripped down C++ of Arduino, especially with runtimes like rp2040_hal at your back.
On the other hand if you look at the poor quality of many Arduino packages, I‘m not sure if we would want that in alire.
I agree to an extent but I think the type system of Ada makes it less likely to be a target. Largely because Ada emphasizes type or as on Arduino you’re probably not going to be doing much with type and if you do you’re going to be trying to avoid type checking because you’re going to be trying to implicitly extend things.
One you need to make it really easy to get into which means you’re going to want to get a very simple library setup pretty quickly. And you’re going to want to make it very configurable for special new hardware and shields as well as probably design something so it can be easily ported to STM 32 and stuff like that because a lot of people who do are do you know will often upgrade to an STM 32 or another microcontroller.
I completely disagree. The type system makes coding on embedded targets so much simpler. You don’t want any ints where the number of bits depends on the architecture. Look at what @godunko did with a0b. I think this is basically what Arduino provides, but written in Ada. Of course platform support is much less right now, but it’s a community effort to support as many targets as possible.