TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Reply To:
Thu, 3 Jun 1999 12:07:31 -0600
text/plain (78 lines)
It seems that most companies don't have a policy for information release, or
that the policy is to not release information. Here at L-3 we have a policy
that is one page long that details how to go about releasing information. It
has been used many times and is pretty much just an exercise in getting
signatures as long as there is no negative information about the company.
Anyone from a janitor to the CEO can release information if they go through
the process.

Having said that I wish we had more Ada programs in house. Sadly it looks
like Ada will become a legacy language here. It's not a technical argument
here, many people believe that Ada is a better choice. Tucker came out here
and did a great job of explaining why Ada is a better choice, even the c++
guys in the presentation conceded that Ada offered engineering benefits over
other languages. I'm trying to at least hold on to Ada, but I'm getting a
lot of resistance.

PR people are concerned about the short term, additionally they are on
overhead so their cost is paid for by the company whether or not they do
anything. Maybe the tactic to try is to suggest to the PR people that it
would be benefitical to let the world know that "We are successful, we have
good people, and we let them use the right tools (Ada) to do the job in a
reliable and repeatable manner (ISO 9000)." Think of it, ISO 9000 companies
who make use of a programming language that is not only an ISO standard, but
is also available in that format. I have yet to see a c++ compiler that
adheres to the c++ standard, I don't know that you can actually buy one.
Besides who wants a language that doesn't allow you to specify where your
bits REALLY go.

One last parting shot. If the approval process is so convoluted as to
prevent it's use then redline it and submit a change request. Most of
companies are ISO 9000, and if you can't  submit changes for policies and
procedures then tit should raise a eyebrows on the ISO auditors!

Anyway, some food for thought!

John T Apa                              [log in to unmask]
L-3 CSW                                 (801) 594-3382
PO Box 16850                            Fax: (801) 594-2195
640 North 2200 West                     Salt Lake City, UT. 84116-0850

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Timberlake [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 10:46 AM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Ada PR?
> >
> >Sad.  I would think that there is *someone* at Boeing would be
> >willing to participate, since Boeing has (or had) an Ada policy.
> >
> OK, the F-22 avionics delivery was mostly Ada.
> As others on this list have observed it is exceedingly difficult for
> engineers (as well as lower level managers) to work the approval
> mechanisms
> for public release of information.  In this particular case, F-22, the
> problem is compounded by the fact that not only Boeing PR is involved, but
> also Lockheed-Martin and the Air Force.
> Contact me privately by e-mail and I can supply e-mail addresses of
> managers who might reply to a politely worded request for information.
> ===============
> Tom Timberlake
> The Boeing Company
> Phantom Works Software
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> P.O. Box 3707
> Mail Stop 4A-25
> Seattle, WA.  98124-2207