TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Classic View

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

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

Print Reply
AdaWorks <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:48:48 -0700
TEXT/PLAIN (67 lines)
I was interested to see the note from Christoph.  For the record, Jon
Erickson, editor of DDJ, has been in discussion with me about doing
a piece on Ada for his magazine. Part of the problem has been my schedule.
Ada is keeping so busy with real work for last several months that I have
had little time for writing anything except my JOOP column.

Also, Jon and I have talked about the perception that DDJ might be
anti-Ada. He is adamant that that is not the case.  However, I think
he was pleased that the recent piece by Eugene Kim stirred up so much
ire in the Ada community.  The letters he received from you folks were
much appreciated and you should continue to write to him.

DDJ will be publishing a piece on GNAT in the near future.

If you want Ada to be represented in DDJ, you have a responsibility
to make it happen.  Jon would be delighted to get some articles on
safety-critical software that highlights Ada.  If you have an application
that contributes some intersting and original ideas (not, "How I
Implemented a Reusable Stack Package") turn it into an article, make
a proposal to the editor, and take his critique seriously when doing
your rewrite.

You can expect more controversial comments about Ada in DDJ.  You can
also expect the same for Java and C++.  This is a publication that has
always like to stir around in the hornet's nest.  If it makes you mad,
it is doing its job.  It you don't speak out, you are not doing yours.

We are fortunate to have, in Jon Erickson, an editor who values spirited
dialog.  Some editors are so myopic they lose their sense of history.
DDJ knows as well as anyone that languages and operating systems come
and go. The new Ada 95 standard is better-suited to the safety-critical
environment than the C family of languages, but no one will know this
unless we write about the many successes, both military and commercial.

The fact that the U.S. Department of Defense has lost sight of its advantage
by abrogating the Ada policy is news.  And DDJ did report the news. Mr
Kim was incorrect in citing lack of technical excellence rather
than political reasons for the change in policy. If he had looked deeper
he would have seen there is a really good story behind the decision.

Your written responses should serve to set the record straight.

Richard Riehle

[log in to unmask]
AdaWorks Software Engineering
Suite 30
2555 Park Boulevard
Palo Alto, CA 94306
(415) 328-1815
FAX  328-1112

On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, Christoph Seelhorst wrote:

> If anybody needs an argument for Ada95, read the article in Dr.Dobb's
> Journal September 1997, "The C++ Standard: What The Heck Is Going On?".
> It should convince everybody NOT to invest any money in C++ projects, as
> nobody knows what sudden twist that proposed standard will take.
> Yes, Dr.Dobb's also supports Ada, though they might not intend it :-)
> Regards, Christoph