TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"(No Name Available)" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 24 Jul 1997 13:59:38 -0400
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
[log in to unmask] (Paul D. Stachour) wrote:
>Unfortunately for our profession, many of the people who call themselves
>software engineers know only one language, for one OS, one one hardware.
>
>To carry Matt's anology, I'd hardly call a person a civil engineer if
>all (s)he knew how to do was build two-lane bridges for 1 car-at-atime
>traffic on lightly traveled rural roads!

And I would not call someone a civil engineer if she could not build any
road without using at least 8 lanes.  Deciding how much effort to expend
is important for cost control, and it would not be good for the world to
see
Ada as a language which could only be used for expensive projects.

If one has no need for tasking or inheritance, Ada still gives great
results
(defects avoided) with its strong typing.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2