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=2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_DATE,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Xref: utzoo comp.lang.ada:2989 comp.lang.c++:5644
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ames!vsi1!octopus!sjsumcs!horstman
From: horstman@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: interesting statistic
Message-ID: <1989Nov24.174408.23364@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu>
Date: 24 Nov 89 17:44:08 GMT
References: <1989Nov19.072556.14606@ico.isc.com> <7172@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Reply-To: horstman@sjsumcs.SJSU.EDU (Cay Horstmann)
Organization: San Jose State University
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <7172@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>>From rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn):
>> I guess we can conclude that NTT maintained a commitment to Ada in spite of
>> a five-year lack of production-quality compilers???
>
>    Conclusion correct... they were apparently doing MIS applications 
>    in which the quality of the object code was not very important.
>
>
>    Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu

I guess we therefore can conclude that Ada is perfectly suited for doing
MIS applications in which the quality of the object code is not very important.

If Ada has friends like Bill, does it need enemies?  :-)

Cay
>