TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Edward Colbert <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Edward Colbert <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 23 Jan 1997 09:10:27 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Hi David,

>
>    Colbert 1 and 3: Dated material, but some parts are relevant

I'm pleased by your evaluation.  I agree some parts are dated.

>    Colbert 2: I strongly urge this package be removed.  It compares the
>    '91 version of C++ to Ada 83.  While it's an interesting package
>    historically, it's hardly worthwhile material for advocacy issues.
>    Using this presentation as a case against C++ would only ensure that
>    Ada is forever banished from that place :-)  Honestly, the effort
>    needed to update this slide series would be better spent just creating
>    a new set of slides.  This is NOT a slam on Ed...his slides are very
>    good quality, and made good comparisons if the languages back then.  I
>    just don't feel it has a place in this advocacy package.

Thanks again for the compliment.  When I sent this paper in originally (about 2 years
ago), I didn't think this would actually be included in the Advocacy package without
update.  But, many people requested it, so I thought Rick might want to include it in the
PAL.  I've been planing to update it.  I actually have enough material prepared in other
presentations that I can pull together; but time has been the limiting factor.  (I notice that
you haven't had this problem ;->).

Take Care,
Ed

ATOM RSS1 RSS2