From: Bob Leif
To: David Botton et al.
Step 1. Use Sun's literature to explain why C++ is obsolete and will be
replaced by Java.
Step 2. We explain, starting with the last Embedded Systems, the problems of
creating a true Java compiler and that Sun was one of the strongest
proponents of C++.
Step 3. The Defense Department should be forced to do an audit comparing the
long-term costs of various programming languages. Presently, DoD is NOT
following good manufacturing practices.
Step 4. The use of XML technology eliminates the need for the legacy Windows
GUI including its convoluted C++ binding. It also eliminates much of the
need for scripting languages.
Parenthetically, a very high priority item is standard way for XML to call
Ada. This must be accepted by the World Wide Web Consortium.
From: Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of David Botton
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 6:02 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Fw: Future of Ada
This is a job for Team-Ada :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jimmy Tucker" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Cc: "Bruce Espedal" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 8:43 AM
Subject: Future of Ada
> My organization, the Defense Automatic Addressing System Center, a field
> level activity of lthe Defense Logistics Agency, has an application
> ADA. We have two ADA programmers, one full-time, and one part-time,
> this project. This application has 140,000 lines of ADA code, and
> the editing, verification and routing of DoD logistics transactions to the
> appropriate destination, based upon business rules described in DoD
> and Service and Agency specific business rules. Upper management is
> to rewrite this application in C++, as we have a greater base of C++
> and one of our ADA programmers is going to retire within the next few
> Our chief of programming is not too sure of the longevity of the ADA
> environment, and is considering this move to C++. What I am trying to
> our ADA programmers in, is to research ADA and its viability for the
> agree with our ADA programmers, and feel that this mission critical
> the concern of migration to C++ might allow for errors creep into the
> lines of existing code, and the associated maintenance considerations for
> average of 152 changes per year to the code. Concern centers around the
> minimization that the ADA compiler supports, and the extensive testing
> might be required to support similar error minimization in the C++ code.
> Concern is also in the area of obtaining another ADA programmer to replace
> current organic government ADA programmers. Contracting out would be a
> solution, but there is a concern of what is available to us. In order for
> have a viable resource, it takes about a year for an ADA programmer to
> effective in our environment, as the individual must become knowledgeable
> DoD logistics business rules, and the quirks with Army, Navy, Ari Force,
> Marine unique logic. Any way we go, we will still have this problem,
> with a contractor, the likelyhood of maintaining a longterm programmer in
> questionable, and we would have to start the training process all over
> Thus, the crux of upper management's concern.
> The chief of programming has the following question that we must answer:
> 'Is ADA going away in the next few years (5-10), and if not - prove it."
> you be able to provide your insight as to the longevity of ADA, and any
> for migration to a C++ environment, such as costs to maintain C++ versus
> testing requirements for C++ versus ADA, etc. We're looking for
> prove our case for ADA. HELP!!!!!
> Jimmy R. Tucker
> 5250 Pearson Road, Bldg 207, Area C
> WPAFB, OH 45433-5328
> Phone: (937) 656-3747
> DSN 986-3747
> Email: [log in to unmask]