From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_20 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 2 Dec 92 16:47:35 GMT
From: pacbell.com!att-out!cbnewsl!willett@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (david.c.willett)
Subject: Re: Open Systems closed to Ada?
Message-ID: <1992Dec2.164735.15636@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>>From article <SRCTRAN.92Dec1230203@world.std.com>, by srctran@world.std.com (G
regory Aharonian):
> [.....................]
>>Even those who profess to like C++ think its greatest feature is backwards
>>compatibility with C.
> 
> Backwards compatibility is a concept that translates poorly into the defense
> world.  In the real world, companies can't afford to write off the investment
> it has in existing software and programmers (companies don't have the tax
> dollar till to constantly dip into), nor can companies ignore the supply of
> programmers and software tools in the marketplace that it draws from (again
> unlike the DoD, which has tax dollars to develop tools (like STARS) and
> programmers whenever it feels like it).
>
	{remainder of Greg's Comments deleted}

Backwards compatibility is used and normal throughout the DoD world.  The
Services (in particular the USN) are notorious for "retrofitting" existing
systems with enhanced technology.
 

DAVE

-- 
Dave Willett          AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies
attmail!dwillett      (AT&T FSAT)
If you think it's so !#$%^& easy, You try it!