Re: "How is Ada doing?"
It's doing OK in its intended market, as far as I can see. It has cornered the market as an intermediate language in safety critical applications.
Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing needs further discussion, probably on a separate occasion.
But since we're here...
Ada in this picture is often an intermediate language because complex system design is typically done in a connect-the-boxes GUI tool (several are available), which duly produces what the GUI tool vendor describes as Ada. It is a matter of faith that this complex and largely unprovable transformation process is obviously entirely trustworthy in every respect.
The "Ada" is then compiled and linked to produce an executable binary. Again, it is a matter of faith that this complex and unprovable transformation process is entirely trustworthy in every respect.
If there's time and budget, the resulting trustworthy executable may be subject to some testing, though in any realistic system the testing can never be exhaustive. So a great deal is taken on trust: if the design meets the spec (the design tool tested that), the executable must be OK too, right?
If we're talking recent avionics (e.g. Dreamliner), it appears the resulting system is then subject to a regulatory approval process involving ticking a few process-related boxes (no subject matter knowledge necessary).
How do you reckon Ada's doing?