TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
X-To: Tucker Taft <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 18:00:33 -0800
From: Hal Hart <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: TRW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (27 lines)
Tucker Taft wrote:

> Here is a possible replacement paragraph which tries to move
> beyond the safety-critical, to the business-critical.  Is
> it an improvement?
> -Tuck
> --------------
>                 When there is no room for error...
>                           Choose Ada.

TUCK:  I very much like this, probably more than anything else I've read
in this tread.  It avoids any of the feature-specific or
single-property-specific buzzwords in many recent msgs that allow
misinterpretation of converses (i.e., Ada's not good for anything except
this).  I doubt that anyone would admit their goal is to write code with
errors, but I surely won't mind turning them off to Ada if errors are
their goal or are even marginally acceptable.  I think part of Ada's
problem has been the over-hype in the 80's as Ada being good for
everything, and this slogan and most others suggested this week appear
to avoid that over-sell and get down to easy-to-demonstrate benefits of
Ada.   You know I have always liked the "high reliability" and "when
failure is not an option" phrases, and your new slogan subsumes them
nicely, IMO.   --hh