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
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Stanley Allen <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Stanley Allen <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 5 May 2000 20:59:07 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
"Harbaugh, John S" wrote:
>
> Great, it's easy to port Ada83 to and Ada95 compiler.  Big deal!
> There is absolutely no mention of Ada's support for their million line
> system, reduced defect rates, or worker productivity.  I got the
> impression that they used Ada 'cause they were told to.  As is typical
> of the modern manager/coach, they are much more interested is team
> interaction and migration plans than the technology.
>

True, but....

Crosstalk is read by many people in the military software world,
and it's a good thing for them to see a big-ticket project that
is sticking with Ada.  You'll notice that the article discusses the
project's decision to migrate off of VAX/VMS because it's "days
were numbered".  In that context, it is notable that they don't
perceive Ada as falling into the same "dead technology" category
(with apologies to VAX/VMS fans -- of which I am one).

The article also makes positive reference to the usefulness of
Ada package specs in the development and integration processes,
especially in regard to "team interaction".  It should strike
a good note for Ada in the ears of software managers.

Stanley Allen
mailto:[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2