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=1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Xref: utzoo comp.lang.ada:3541 comp.software-eng:3280
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!haven!grebyn!ted
From: ted@grebyn.com (Ted Holden)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.software-eng
Subject: A few notes
Keywords: diatribe = 100+ lines / Ada proceedings report = fiction
Message-ID: <19494@grebyn.com>
Date: 25 Mar 90 03:09:42 GMT
Followup-To: comp.lang.ada
Organization: Grebyn Timesharing, Vienna, VA
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


A few final comments here (a real diatribe = 100+ lines...)


From:  Bill Wolfe, Clemson
 
>>>From ted@grebyn.com (Ted Holden):
>>  [alleged problem with Ada:]
>>      o    Major project many months behind schedule (e.g.
>>           STASNFINS, space telescope, WISS etc.)
 
>   That's interesting, Ted... according to the Proceedings of the
>   Eighth Annual National Conference on Ada Technology (p. 140),
>   STANFINS-R was completed on time and within budget, and it was
>   observed that the Ada code ran significantly faster than its COBOL
>   counterpart.  This is despite the fact that STANFINS-R had to take
>   raw COBOL programmers and train them to be Ada Software Engineers,
>   despite the fact that a CICS binding did not exist when the project
>   began (and therefore had to be created during the project), and despite
>   the fact that a Datacom/DB interface also had to be forced into existence.
 
>   Not only was the Army's Information Systems Software Development Center
>   tremendously pleased with the results, the Air Force has just announced
>   its decision to use STANFINS-R as its financial software system as well.
 
>   Any other flat-out lies you'd like to spread?
 
>   Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu
 
In the current (March 19) issue of Government Computer News, page 62, we
read that the SAT for STANFINS is now scheduled for May of this year.
Actually, that's a reschedule, and probably one of several.  Major
General Alonzo E. Short is quoted in the article as follows:
 
 
     "We are going to have to spawn something in Ada - a system that has
     been planned, developed, and placed on the street in such a way
     that someone can say, 'Ada is solving my problem'.
 
     Because such a system has not been delivered yet, a fair assessment
     is that the jury is still out on whether Ada can be used
     efficiently in a large information system.
 
     Many of us are standing on the sidelines awaiting the outcome to
     see how Ada works for a large MIS.
 
     If we don't start sharing the good news, we will soon have to start
     sharing the bad news..."
 
 
 
Come on Wolfie, make my day:  call General Short a liar.
 
 
................................................................
 
Dirty Laundry = fix a few things, old code recompiles with five minutes
of work on new compilers (add function profiles to old C programs)
 
Up Shit Creek = any of the real fixes needed would break the language;  two
versions of Ada maintained for all times afterwards (as if one version
wasn't bad enough).
 
.................................................................
 
True Meaning of the term 'FIVE Year Plan':
 
 
>From: Robert I. Eachus,  Mitre
 
>The same thing seems to be happening on Ada 9X.  There is a
>groundswell developing to fix a few small things NOW, and leave the
>rest til later.
 
>It will probably take five years to get a good proposal
>together.  I also think that that is a minimum time to study some of
>these issues and come up with something that mixes cleanly with the
>existing language...
 
 
Translation into plain English:
 
   "By that time, I'll be living in another town, doing something else
   for a living, maybe even using a different name, yeah... and some
   other poor sucker can deal with THIS bullshit..."
 
 
Ted Holden
HTE