From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!sunbelt!eaker From: eaker@sunbelt.crd.ge.com (Charles E Eaker) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Legislative Mandate for Ada; mindless translations Message-ID: <14976@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> Date: 18 Dec 90 15:21:02 GMT Sender: news@crdgw1.crd.ge.com Organization: General Electric Corporate R&D Center List-Id: In article <2467@sparko.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu () writes: >Is there any consensus on this out there (after all, I'm stuck in the >Ivory Tower :-))? Mindless translations are the expected response to mindless mandates, and mindless mandates appear to be on the rise, especially in government contracts. So, if code that does the job exists in some other language, a mindless translator can give you the same algorithms working in whatever language is mandated for the current project and save a lot of money. There are enormous incentives to do just that, and there is no reason to believe that the output of such a translator is any more or less maintainable than the input. Actually, some believe that translators can be produced which will generate code which satisfies coding standards and conventions which experience has shown to be more readily understood, modifiable, etc. -- Chuck Eaker / P.O. Box 8, K-1 3C12 / Schenectady, NY 12301 USA eaker@crd.ge.com eaker@crdgw1.UUCP (518) 387-5964