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
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Steven Deller <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 18 Nov 1999 00:45:12 -0500
text/plain (52 lines)
> Also, a good point. My notes about Rational were probably a little
> extreme.  However, it is annoying to visit some non-DoD conference
> and find that the personnel in the Rational booth are either ignorant
> of Ada or regard it as an insignificant issue.  It bothers me when I
> find that Rational marketing people insist that Ada is only a military
> language and doesn't merit any mention in a non-Military venue.

It bothers us too.

Rational hires about 20 new people every week.  It is hard to ferret them out
and educate them regarding Ada when they are faced with learning the entire
Rational product line, including Rational University process tools and
education, requirements management and risk management tools, one of the best
configuration management tools, a slew of testing tools for functional
testing, coverage testing, and load testing on NT and all major UNIX systems.
 And on and on.

When this occurs, we go back and try to educate them.  Not everyone can grok
the "Ada religion" evident on this mailing list.

What many have seen as Rational "giving up Ada" is actually Rational working
hard to be "language neutral".

Rational believes that trying to sell a latter day PC to a 16th Century
peasant is an effort doomed to failure.  So instead Rational has focused on
trying to educate the peasants in "process", "requirements analysis", and
"design".  These have little to do with the language chosen.

One hopes that when the peasants are educated, they will tend to pick a
language that best supports the software engineering paradigms they have
learned.  However, Rational also believes that understanding software
engineering principles and having tools that support those principles reduces
the impact of a "wrong" language choice.

That said, I just came from an Ada customer that is doing 1970s style
programming, and worse, is dead set on moving their process to a 1960s style.
 Sigh...  No CM.  No requirements.  No architecture.  My only hope is that
they move to C++ before their painfully poor process results in an airplane
crash using Ada.  I'm serious -- they make software that controls commercial
aircraft.

That is just a wake up call to those with the Ada religion.  Just because
someone has your bible, does not mean they are saved ;-}.

Regards,
Steve

Steven Deller, Apex Ada Marketing
[log in to unmask], (410) 757 6924
Rational Software Corporation, http://www.rational.com
For user email groups, check  http://www.rational.com/support/newsgroup

ATOM RSS1 RSS2