Re: DARPA admits Ada gets in the way

[ads.com!ckaun@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Carl Kaun)]

I am a contractor who has worked on a number of DARPA projects.  My
comments reflect this experience, but otherwise are my own opinions,
(and especially not those of my employer).

aha@mathsoft.com (Greg Aharonian) writes:

  ... <deleted material>

>>  That it has taken this long for people in DARPA finally to say something
>>  tells alot about the supression of dissent inside the DoD.  After all,

Suppression of dissent?  My experience is that at DARPA it has been
basically a non-issue, because (at least in the areas of DARPA where I
have been involved) DARPA has not been forced to use Ada.  Even where
there was encouragement to do so, it was relatively easy to write
justifications avoiding its use.

>>  And if these people are stating these things publicly, imagine the rest
>>  of the dissent that is still being suppressed within the DoD with regards

Again, "these people" (referring to DARPA) discuss things, publicly or
not, when it becomes an issue to them, and when not otherwise
proscribed by security needs. In a 25 year career in DoD and working
as a DoD contractor, I have never detected (IMHO)
any significant "suppression" of discussion on non-security matters. I
object to the post-hoc arguments whose premise (unsupported by
evidence) is that if you do not (or have not) hear(d) others express
opinions matching your own, then it is because those who hold such
opinions are (or have been) suppressed.  Such intellectual flabbiness
leads shortly to unreality or dishonesty.

>>  to Ada.  If you read the program to the next Tri-Ada Conference, you will
not see anything that reflects this dissension at all.

Post-hoc again. The content probably reflects the selections of the
organizers, who may wish to promote the use of Ada, and not
suppression as the statement seems to imply.

>> What is so pathetic about the defense community botching of Ada is that
>> with less money and attention, it's VHDL language is catching on like crazy
>>   ... <material deleted>

Is it botched?  Why is it pathetic that a good language with features
similar to Ada is catching on?  ... <many other questions>.

----- 
Bottom line: I don't believe DoD is suppressing discussion, I would
hate to have others think that it is unless there is other evidence
for it.  I do not address the issue of whether DoD policy concerning
Ada use has been premature, excessive, or heavy-handed.  That is a
different issue than the "suppressing discussion" issue.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
      Carl F. Kaun       ckaun@ads.com        415/960-7420
---------------------------------------------------------------------