TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
"(No Name Available)" <[log in to unmask]>
Sat, 21 Nov 1998 09:06:52 EST
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
text/plain (82 lines)
Certainly changing due to lack of compiler support or due to a need
for new features is worthwhile in particular circumstances.  My concern
was that something not be portrayed on a public list as "inaappropriate"
just because it uses Ada83.

Some of the most troublesome software my friends encounter is painful
precisely because people decided to change languages rather than train
programmers (neither language is Ada, and neither language is much
better than the other aside from the issue of programmer availability).

Larry Kilgallen

[log in to unmask] wrote and then quoted:

>It is when its being redesigned in Ada95 instead of c\c++. A decision
>was made to redesign code in Ada95 to get the increased support from
>tools and compiler vendors. I think that's a success when a decision
>like that is made. They could have just as easily have chosen to
>redesign in c\c++.
>Perhaps my use of "moved" was not quite accurate, I should have said
>redesigned. But in any case the decision to purchase Ada95
>tools/training and migrate towards it shows a longer term commitment
>than using a 6 year old unsupported Ada83 compiler just because it's
>cheaper and still Ada.
>John Apa
>L-3 CSW
>-----Original Message-----
>From:  (No Name Available) [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent:  Thursday, November 19, 1998 6:32 PM
>To:    [log in to unmask]
>Subject:       Re: Ada market viability
>[log in to unmask] (John Apa) quoted and then wrote:
>>Boeing Commercial Aircraft Avionics. # 4
>>Airbus Commercial Aircraft Avionics. # 5
>>Plus Business Class Jet Avionics. # 6
>>The above are still Ada83, but I believe that plans are still
>>to move them to Ada95.
>Moving something that works to Ada95 is not a benefit in and of
>Larry Kilgallen
>----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
>Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
>Received: from ( [])
>by (v51.29) with SMTP; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 10:40:25 1900
>Received: from ( [])
>         by (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
>         with SMTP id KAA07119 for <[log in to unmask]>;
>         Fri, 20 Nov 1998 10:40:24 -0500 (EST)
>From: [log in to unmask]
>Received: from by
>       id IAA00423; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 08:40:23 -0700
>Received: by with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server
>Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52)
>       id <[log in to unmask]>; Fri, 20 Nov 1998 08:40:22
>Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>, <[log in to unmask]>
>Cc: <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: RE: Ada market viability
>Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1998 08:40:21 -0700
>Return-Receipt-To: <[log in to unmask]>
>X-Mailer:  Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit