TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
From: Stanley Allen <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 20:59:07 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: Stanley Allen <[log in to unmask]>
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]