It's really not helpful to put examples here that are basically Animal IS Dog level of argumentation. Making toy types like that may help to convince some beginners, but really these features are just unflexible. They work if you're not doing any arithmetic on these values, in which case the type safety is not really needed in the first place. Otherwise (if you're doing arithmetic) they're very much a chore, making code more verbose and in many cases raising complexity to the point where you're starting to introduce enterprisey uber-complicated systems that can easily lead to many thousand lines of boilerplate for solutions that are looking for an actual problem.
And overall, Pascal's type system is NOT so much better. Not strictly better at all, if at all any better. It's a chore to do the simplest things, starting from the mess that is the various types of strings, to a confusing memory management story, continuing with extremely verbose type declaration syntax (which requires to add many additional names), to the mess that is 0-based vs 1-based indexing, and let me not start with the messy object systems that were put on top in Delphi.
If you ask me it's definitely WORSE over all, although for example Delphi has nice aspects to it, especially in the IDE.
Oh yeah, and if Ada was ever adopted by a significant adoption of programmers, then they probably have committed suicide in the meantime.
I don't know how much effort you put into finding this, but the result feels almost like a certificate of quality to me and confirmed my opinion that this style of coding is pretty f*ing safe in practice. And that while I spent definitely less than 1% time on debugging memory issues (running valgrind twice, according to my git history, compared to working on this project during 7 months, initially 2.5 months full time, leading to an estimate of about 500h of development time).
