While one can choose to dismiss the TIOBE index (I don’t have any strong opinion about it), there was also a screen shot of PYPL showing a steady increase in Ada over recent months. Something positive is happening!
A few days ago, I had ChatGPT compare Rust and Ada. It tended to penalize Ada for its runtime checks and access values (aka pointers). However, ChatGPT didn't account for the fact that many of Ada's runtime checks would need to be manually implemented by developers in other languages. An Ada compiler, can often optimizes these checks away, knowing where they're genuinely needed and where they can be removed. This often explains why speed comparisons between C and Ada code can be misleading, as they rarely factor in the extra manual effort required to make C code equivalently robust with necessary safety checks.
Regarding access values, I listed out some of Ada's various restrictions. Its scope rules prevent referencing objects at deeper levels, objects must be explicitly marked aliased to create an access value to them, and there's far less need for access values (for instance, no pointers are needed to pass parameters by reference). Additionally, Ada offers the ability to dynamically size some objects and reclaim their memory without explicit memory allocation.
After I highlighted these details, ChatGPT admitted it had unfairly evaluated Ada, concluding it's a very safe and robust language, albeit using different techniques than Rust.
I recall watching a presentation about C++20. During the presentation, the presenter said there were about 163 undefined behaviors in the C language (note: I think it was C99) which implied there were many more in C++ since it’s a much more complex language. Unfortunately, I don’t have a link to that presentation.
You might have heard about the SPARK variant of Ada. I recall reading in an article many years ago that the original version of SPARK was based on Ada83 because it is a very safe language with a lot less undefined behaviors, which is key to trying to statically prove the correctness of a program.