TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 15:31:58 +0900
Reply-To: Toshitaka Kumano <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp
Organization: Mitsubishi Space Software
From: Toshitaka Kumano <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (37 lines)
Hello Team-Ada,

We developed an experimental naval system in the early 1990',
which was very large scale real-time system, programmed almost with Ada83,
and with a little of C89 / assembler code.

Now we plan to put the system into actual production in coming years,
but the manager and some system engineers are very dubious that Ada will
survive, say, in a decade from now, and they consider that maintenance
problem shall arise, sooner or later, by shortage of various tool chain.

They plan to convert manually the entire sources from Ada83 to C++,
that is very ridiculous, from my viewpoint as an evangelist of Ada
for its technical superiority, and a believer of the survival of the

However, such a report in U.S. like
is enough to persuade managers in Japan that "Ada is Dead or Dying".

To persuade manager with technical superiority of Ada is of no use here,
because they understand that to some extent, and they simply concern
about shortage or soaring price of tools in future.

I need some powerful advocacy among U.S. defense developers that
"Ada will Survive", even if it (she?) may be not of mainstream of future
information systems.

Any URL to *recently* published report or articles are welcome,
but forecast articles from Navy or DoD officials, or articles for some
long life-cycle defense system with Ada, would be most powerful
for persuation.

Toshitaka KUMANO