I suggest you contact the Ada vendors. ACT in particular can make a
very good case that they will survive. Then ask the C++ vendors the
same question.

Ask this question: "which tool vendors will sign a ten year support
contract with us". Ada companies will; I'm not sure about C++ companies.


Toshitaka Kumano <[log in to unmask]> writes:

> Hello Team-Ada,
>
> We developed an experimental naval system in the early 1990',
> which was very large scale real-time system, programmed almost with Ada83,
> and with a little of C89 / assembler code.
>
> Now we plan to put the system into actual production in coming years,
> but the manager and some system engineers are very dubious that Ada will
> survive, say, in a decade from now, and they consider that maintenance
> problem shall arise, sooner or later, by shortage of various tool chain.
>
> They plan to convert manually the entire sources from Ada83 to C++,
> that is very ridiculous, from my viewpoint as an evangelist of Ada
> for its technical superiority, and a believer of the survival of the
> language.
>
> However, such a report in U.S. like
> http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/03.reports/pdf/03tn021.pdf
> is enough to persuade managers in Japan that "Ada is Dead or Dying".
>
> To persuade manager with technical superiority of Ada is of no use here,
> because they understand that to some extent, and they simply concern
> about shortage or soaring price of tools in future.
>
>
> I need some powerful advocacy among U.S. defense developers that
> "Ada will Survive", even if it (she?) may be not of mainstream of future
> information systems.
>
> Any URL to *recently* published report or articles are welcome,
> but forecast articles from Navy or DoD officials, or articles for some
> long life-cycle defense system with Ada, would be most powerful
> for persuation.
>
> --
> Toshitaka KUMANO
>
>

--
-- Stephe