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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,59f7ca851a394aa3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: Reasons NOT To Choose Ada Date: 1996/12/06 Message-ID: <1996Dec6.082402.1@eisner>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 202679461 x-nntp-posting-host: eisner.decus.org references: <32872161.19FE@eurocontrol.fr> x-nntp-posting-user: KILGALLEN x-trace: 849878646/17521 organization: LJK Software newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-12-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) writes: > In article <1996Dec4.190401.1@eisner> kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) writes: >> Yes, rather than torture programmers with frequent language changes >> the Ada community prefers to torture purchasing agents with frequent >> company and product name changes. ObjectAda is now from a company >> called Aonix. Formerly Thomson. Former Alsys. > > Yeah, really! Criminey, I was just getting used to "Thomson"... I spoke to someone at their booth in Philadelphia yesterday, and they convinced me of the wisdom of the change. Although Thomson was an appealing name to me, there are groups of prospective customers in other countries for whom it was not an appealing name. I am sure those customers will buy more compilers than I will, and anything which makes their compiler more popular without undermining technical quality is fine with me. Larry Kilgallen P.S. Off topic ? Well, I guess I am saying that name changes may be worthy of grousing on c.l.a, but they do _not_ constitute a reasonable basis for avoiding Ada :-)