> I am writing this in my role as Ada columnist for Journal of
> Object-Oriented Programming (JOOP).
> With regard to the message (below) from Secretary Paige's office forwarded
> by Rush Kester regarding the abrogation of long-standing Ada policy:
> I am composing my column for a future (probably June or July) issue of
> the JOOP and will be expected to comment on this unfortunate decision.
> I would welcome input from members of Team-Ada for quotation and
> attribution in that column.
As someone who has been involved with Ada for a long time, I just have
to respond to this. I believe that Mr. Page is doing a very reasonable
thing. The Ada mandate has been totally ineffective. All it has done
is driven the cost of compilers and support tools out of the range
that any organization except a DoD funded one can afford. Smart
organizations will continue to us Ada and get the advantage in the
market place it gives you. The ones who haven't wanted to use Ada
have been ducking the mandate from the beginning. For example,
the command and control systems for the Navy and the Air Force
as almost all in C. In fact, the mandated DII COE has no Ada interface
and no plan to generate one. The mandate has never been enforced
and all of the best intentions of Mr. Page will change that. Until
someone is sent to jail for not following it, no one will enforce it.
If you what software that is reliable and maintainable it is easier to
write it in Ada, otherwise it can be written in C.
The current US market is driven by quick and buggy not by quality.
The DoD contractors are no exception. I agree with Ed Yourdon that
the US software industry will go though what the US auto industry
did. Remember, it takes very little capital to develop software.
I have to include a statement that this message reflects only my
opinions/beliefs, and should not be construed in any manner to reflect
opinions/beliefs of any organization or company with which I am now
or have been affiliated.
Sr. Princ. Engineer
The MITRE Corp.