TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Dale Jr, William" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 09:39:14 -0800
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain
Reply-To: "Dale Jr, William" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (78 lines)
OK,
I disagree.....

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard L. Conn [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 8:07 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      What the competition looks like
>
> Hi, Everyone,
>
> I've observed with interest the recent discussions
> about adding an http protocol library to the freeware
> collection of resource we have for the Ada community.
        [Dale Jr, William]
        [SNIP]

> I'm an Ada fan as well, but I think Ada has its target
> in arenas other than those in the more popular venue.
> We need safety critical software for the subways,
> airlines, medical systems, and other systems where
> lives are at stake.  At the part of Lockheed where I
> work, I have not heard a peep about moving in any
> direction other than Ada for our aircraft, and that's
> just because it makes sense.
>
        [Dale Jr, William]
        LMMS has almost totally abandoned Ada in favor of C++.
        Fortran is also heavily favored over anything Ada.  There
        is a battle to wage even when technical sense says "use Ada."
        The reason this happens is that all the grunt programmers
        want C++, Java, WinNT, and MS on their resume.

        Management sees Ada as a steep training curve ($$$) and the
        "popular" tools (i.e., MS) as the cheap route to go.

        All of you above discussion about Mickysofts tools are
        the reason we MUST challenge them on their own turf.

> So, I think that we should focus our energies in the
> direction of the safety critical systems.  We don't
> have enough resources to divide them otherwise.  Ada
> is already well-enough designed to let it work with
> these other technologies (I've already put up a pair
> of demos on my university website showing a web-based
> interface to Ada and a Visual Basic front-end to an
> Ada engine).  I think we should let the others evolve
> as they are going and we should focus on moving Ada
> along its line of strength ... a line that distinguishes
> it from the others, and a line where it is needed,
> particularly since the others clearly don't fit this
> need.
>
        [Dale Jr, William]

        Great ideas and tools, but management and the grunt
        programmers keep jamming the others into just this
        niche anyway.  It's more career effective to management
        to "test in" safety than to built it in with good
        technology and processes up front.

>  If you want to see the interfaces I've mentioned,
> here is my university website for them:
>   http://unicoi.kennesaw.edu/~rconn/
>
> Just my opinion,
> Rick
> ----------------------------------
> Richard Conn, ASE and PAL Manager
> http://xenadu.home.mindspring.com/
        [Dale Jr, William]


William L. Dale
Just my opinion, too
mailto:[log in to unmask]
mailto:[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2