Having relocated just over a year ago, I find myself once again in the job
market (a post-9-11 layoff).
I am finding that most, if not all, the Ada jobs will require another
relocation. I had hoped that that would not be the case in the Dallas/Fort
Worth Metroplex. Lockheed Martin cites no language in their JSF postings,
and conversations here (cla) indicate it's not Ada. (It would be a
relocation, too, from east Dallas 'burb, to west FW company, but that's
o.k.) Other companies appear to have converted to other languages or sent
their Ada work elsewhere... or just aren't hiring now.
www.flipdog.com and www.headhunter.net seem to be better than
www.monster.com, but the boards at AdaIC are not very helpful (few jobs, out
of date). It would certainly help to match Ada-friendly companies with the
qualified Ada programmers they need if there was more up-to-date information
there (or somewhere!)
In the meantime, if someone out there wants to get a finder's fee for
referring a dyed-in-the-wool-Ada-fanatic... er, ahem, experienced Ada
software engineer... (veteran of JUG, AdaJUG, AdaTec, SIGAda, Ada Follies
Working Group...), well, you know where I am.
"Richard Riehle" <[log in to unmask]> wrote in message
> "ben@NO_SPAM_EMAIL" wrote:
> > That is funny. It is almost impossible to find any Ada wanted ads these
> > Actually there are more openings for almost any other language than for
> > Can you point to ONE commerical Ada opening right now that requires no
> > active security clearance in the US? I bet you there is none.
> Over and over, we encounter companies who, after deciding to use Ada for
> its technological advantages, cannot hire qualified Ada programmers. Our
> most recent experience was a company in Silicon Valley. They were excited
> about using Ada, asked us to train some of the people, and then tried to
> more programmers to do Ada. They found it nearly impossible to find
> people with experience in their domain, sufficient mathematics, and lots
> of experience in Ada. Sadly, they finally decided to use C++ because it
> was so much easier to find programmers.
> We encounter this same problem with DoD contractors. One reason I am
> by major DoD software developers, for their choice of C++ is availability
> of personnel. Often they admit the superiority of Ada but justify their
> of C++ or Java on the basis of the difficulty of hiring Ada programmers.
> In those same organizations, many programmers don't want to program in Ada
> because they see few commercial opportunities for that skill. These
> don't care whether Ada is a better language. They care about the future
> career. The companies don't care whether Ada is superior to C++. They
> often admit it is. They do care about being able to hire people who want
> program in Ada.
> One can dismiss this as a "chicken and egg" problem. However, it is a
> that needs solving. There are still a few brave non-DoD managers out
> enjoying the benefits of Ada and would choose nothing else. This kind of
> enlightenment is not as widespread as we might like.
> If the DoD had not given the impression of abandoning Ada when it did, we
> be a lot further ahead. Yes, I know, abandonment was not the intention
> letter that abrogated the mandate, but that is how it is widely
interpreted by both
> DoD contractors and commercial organizations that might have chosen it.
> need to raise the visibility of Ada in the media, and among our non-Ada
> At present, no one is making any effective effort to make Ada visible and
> to the larger software community. Nothing is being done to promote it
> software managers at DoD contractor sites, not to mention the non-DoD
> Those commercial organizations who have chosen Ada have done so on
> the basis of their own wisdom. They benefit from that choice and rarely
> benefit of proseletyzing their competitors.
> As a technology, I believe Ada is still a better choice for many software
> It is going to take something more than better technology to make the
> long time ago, Ralph Crafts was a powerful spokesman for the industry. He
> gave up, recognizing that his "voice in the wilderness" was not being as
> as it should have been. No one has stepped in to take over the work
> doing. If someone has stepped in, they are not making themselves or Ada
> Richard Riehle