Re: Computerworld Focus on OOP is good obituary for Ada

[tinton.ccur.com!cjh@princeton.edu (Christopher J. Henrich)]

In <1993Jun15.161156.28448@tinton.ccur.com> cjh@tinton.ccur.com I wrote:

>In <SRCTRAN.93Jun14142701@world.std.com> srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharon
ian) writes:


>>   The June 14 issue of Computerworld, pages 107 to 123, presents a guide
>>to object oriented programming products, companies and tools.  ADA IS NOT
>>MENTIONED ONCE.  What two languages were covered in the Buyers' Scorecard
>>of user satsifaction ratings?   ParcPlace's and Digitalk's Smalltalk, and
>>Borland's and Microsoft's C++.  Eight full pages of commentary on OOP and
>>not one mention of Ada.

>Greg makes a valid point here.  I can't find the issue of CW to which
>he refers, but I am willing to conjecture that this guide includes
>the C++ library supported by Rational - i.e. the Booch components.
>If so, why not the Ada version of the same library?

My conjecture went the way of most conjectures: into the wastebasket.
Rational, and the Booch tools, are not mentioned.  So the rest of my
article may be moot.  In particular, I withdraw my implied criticism
of Rational. 

Is the CW article (group of articles, really) ominous for Ada?  I
don't think so.  The ComputerWorld feature seems to be mostly addressed 
to people who are concerned with management information systems.  
This is not really an arena for which Ada was intended.

Is the absence of Ada from CW's picture evidence of a failure by the
DoD?  Definitely not.  It is no part of the DoD's job to control how
private enterprise takes care of its own information systems.

Is it evidence that Ada vendors are missing an opportunity?
Quite possibly yes.  Ada could be a factor in the MIS marketplace.
However-- not every hardware or software vendor is interested
in that marketplace.  And I can't see that they have any duty to be
so.

Regards,
Chris Henrich