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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!netcomsv!jls
From: jls@netcom.COM (Jim Showalter)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: You get what you pay for (not true in software)
Message-ID: <1991Jun21.221023.18095@netcom.COM>
Date: 21 Jun 91 22:10:23 GMT
References: <"13-Jun-91.14:53:27.EDT".*.Martin_A._Leisner.Henr801C@Xerox.com> 	<2356@raybed2.msd.ray.com> <EMERY.91Jun20145620@Dr_No.mitre.org>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  UNIX System {408 241-9760 guest}
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>Probably the greatest benefit from the ALS and AIE government-funded
>Ada compiler contracts is the large number of people who worked at
>SofTech and Intermetrics, and then went on to build a second
>(successful) Ada compiler (usually somewhere else).  This is a side of
>Ada technology transfer that has not been adequately recognized and
>acknowledged as part of an Ada success story.

Yet more proof that one always builds one to throw away. Nothing wrong
with this, provided it IS thrown away (which brings up ALS/N...), and
provided it doesn't cost too much, which I think ALS did. Hell, Rational
built its entire environment for less than the government spent on ALS.
-- 
*** LIMITLESS SOFTWARE, Inc: Jim Showalter, jls@netcom.com, (408) 243-0630 ****
*Proven solutions to software problems. Consulting and training on all aspects*
*of software development. Management/process/methodology. Architecture/design/*
*reuse. Quality/productivity. Risk reduction. EFFECTIVE OO usage. Ada/C++.    *