The Sun C compiler was an additional cost item, just like everyone else.
That was my point.
https://www.nongnu.org/gm2/homepage.html
However I doubt the language gets much use nowadays beyond some legacy code bases, its opportunity is now gone.
The Ariane 5 maiden flight disaster illustrated quite clearly that the choice of language has little influence on the actual correctness of a program.
Ada on its own is no better than Pascal in that regard. A formally verified and thoroughly tested MISRA C program can be safer and more correct than a sloppily written Ada program.
So the question is indeed not as rhetorical as one might think - why spend the extra money indeed? Isn't it better spent on verification, testing, tooling and culture, which benefits the development regardless of programming language?
So yes, it is quite worthy to reduce the amount of money spent in verification, testing, tooling and culture.
The alternative is to just give up that programmers will never learn and just force verification at hardware level, like Google is doing on Android.
"Memory Tagging for the Kernel: Tag-Based KASAN"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-Rm7JFsJGI
Oracle on Solaris SPARC,
https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E37838_01/html/E61059/gqajs.html
Apple on iOS,
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/security/preparing...
Microsoft on Azure Sphere,
https://www.microsoft.com/security/blog/2020/11/17/meet-the-...
http://www-users.math.umn.edu/~arnold/disasters/ariane5rep.h...
http://www.adapower.com/index.php?Command=Class&ClassID=FAQ&...
Ada suffered from its domain, original price of compilers, and the few UNIX vendors that cared to offer compiler like Sun, it was an additional acquisiation on top of UNIX SDK.
Everyone knows that only newbies do coding errors in C, so why spend the extra money? /s