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=0.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 5 Feb 93 15:25:53 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu !milano!cobweb.mcc.com!breland@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Mark A. Breland) Subject: Re: Revised List of non-Defense Ada Projec Message-ID: <1993Feb5.152553.16797@mcc.com> List-Id: In article 93Feb4181120@world.std.com, srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian ) writes: > This paucity of non-government Ada projects only reinforces the >message that Ada is very, very slowly making inroads into the >non-Mandated world. I am sure many inside the DoD celebrate this >list as a measure of success, which further delays any meaningful >reform of Ada software policies. I can understand Greg's frustration with DoD's archane and somewhat polarized approach to Ada use and reuse. But Greg, may I suggest relinquishing your courageous grip on your Don Quixote lance, and rather than tilt with the DoD or unresponsive Ada community windmills, divert your efforts to *encouraging* commercial implementations? It is quite clear that DoD will not waver (pun intended!) in the face of folks who have railed against the Ada mandate since its inception. So what to do? The defense industry is rapidly winding down with priorities already switching to means for accomplishing defense conversion. We're going to see more of the software workforce migrating out of defense into the commercial world. Using world history as a point of reference, I feel comfortable in asserting that true revolutionary change originates from the masses, not from individual dictation. Ada's acceptance and use (reuse) will come about through decisions we make as practicing engineers. We all have choices that we can make to affect our environment... those too reticent to take a risk and make hard choices won't make a difference anyway. I, for one, prefer to get on with the business of creation. Yes, it is appropriate to strive for change through normal channels; however, once that closed door won't open, it's time to seek other avenues. That DoD door isn't going to open just because we keep yelling at it. Excuses that one is forced to deal with a mandated language don't wash with me. I've been there, I've dealt with dictates, and when I could no longer effect change within my system, I left (with dignity no less). But I haven't given up...I still have choices, I still see many ways where Ada is quite appropriate, and I am using it in ways and on applications that strategically open it up for a broader scope of use. If you want to see Ada make inroads commercially, make it happen. Promote it, encourage its use, acknowledge its weaknesses but accentuate its strengths. If you want a software reuse repository, start one. Somebody started all the C repositories, didn't they?...and I don't think it was a conscious government decision. Make a difference and effect the change yourself. Rah, rah! --- Mark A. Breland - Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation (MCC) Ada Fault Tolerance | voice: (512) 338-3509 3500 West Balcones Center Drive | FAX: (512) 338-3900 Austin, Texas 78759-6509 USA | internet: breland@mcc.com