TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show HTML 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]>
Date:
Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:56:12 -0500
Reply-To:
Content-type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Subject:
From:
Philip Johnson <[log in to unmask]>
Content-transfer-encoding:
7BIT
In-Reply-To:
Organization:
PEI Electronics Inc
MIME-Version:
1.0
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
> [log in to unmask] says:
> >Rational Rose has an Ada add-in that successfully generates Ada 95 from
> >UML.
>   Perhaps a Rational employee, say the guest editor of the issue,
> would like to send a letter to the editor correcting the article's
> ignorance of the situation.
>   Ditto for other folks' illumination on the subject, especially as
> they go cover other areas than the Rational Rose product.

I remember earlier this year having passed on a comment made by
a Rational employee in response to my query about support for
Ada 95 in Rational Rose. To paraphrase, Rational doesn't see Ada
as a viable language, so will not be supported.

I got a fairly adamant response from Rational's Ada product
manager correcting that erroneous statement.  He said,
[paraphrasing] Rational offers Ada development tools and would
provide an Ada 95 module for Rose [full round trip engineering
would be supported for Apex Ada, code generation only would be
supported for straight Ada95].

The Rational Ada Product Manager would be the best source for
comment.  Hopefully, he will set the story straight again.

Phil Johnson

ATOM RSS1 RSS2