From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: A question for my personal knowledge.
Date: 1999/05/10
Date: 1999-05-10T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1999May10.152652.1@eisner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 1VEZ2.1515$I51.88140@carnaval.risq.qc.ca
In article <1VEZ2.1515$I51.88140@carnaval.risq.qc.ca>, "Siamak Kaveh" <kaveh@meca.polymtl.ca> writes:
> Hello Everybody,
>
> Accepting that Ada is one of the best available programming languages, the
> following question comes to my mind: Why BIG PLAYERS of computer industry
> (IBM, HP, COMPAQ(Digital), CRAY, Microsoft, SUN...) don't develop their
> native ADA compiler? (or they disconnected their development).
IBM and DEC both developed their own Ada83 compilers, and both their
products are still available for the two vendor's high-end commercial
operating systems (although the IBM one now comes from OC Systems).
For Ada95 DEC decided to rely on Rational for Unix and ACT for Alpha VMS.
If those vendors build good compilers it is not clear that there is some
inherent advantage to DEC in doing their own (although I tend to favor
the DEC compiler).
> Do their engineers and managers understand that using ADA can improve
> quality of their software?
This is an entirely different question, pertaining to using Ada
rather than developing an Ada compiler. I see no connection
between what compiler you want to use and what compiler is
most profitable to sell, particularly if your sales staff
not particularly dedicated to selling compilers.
It could even be argued that the most profitable compiler to be selling
is the one which causes the largest number of programmers to be used
on any particular programming project, because you sell more licenses.
Larry Kilgallen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-05-10 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-05-10 0:00 A question for my personal knowledge Siamak Kaveh
1999-05-10 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen [this message]
1999-05-10 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1999-05-12 0:00 ` Charlie McCutcheon
1999-05-12 0:00 ` Werner Pachler
1999-05-17 0:00 ` Charlie McCutcheon
1999-05-17 0:00 ` bglbv
1999-05-17 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-05-18 0:00 ` bglbv
1999-05-19 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-05-10 0:00 ` Sam
1999-05-10 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-05-10 0:00 ` Paul Whittington
1999-05-10 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-05-10 0:00 ` Roy Grimm
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Pascal Obry
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Roy Grimm
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-05-11 0:00 ` dennison
1999-05-13 0:00 ` Mike Yoder
1999-05-13 0:00 ` Mike
1999-05-13 0:00 ` Martin C. Carlisle
1999-05-14 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
1999-05-13 0:00 ` Mike
1999-05-13 0:00 ` David Starner
1999-05-18 0:00 ` Georg Bauhaus
1999-05-13 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1999-05-14 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
1999-05-14 0:00 ` Steve
1999-05-15 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
1999-05-15 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1999-05-14 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
1999-05-15 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1999-05-18 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-05-18 0:00 ` Hyman Rosen
1999-05-18 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-05-18 0:00 ` Hyman Rosen
1999-05-19 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Roy Grimm
1999-05-12 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Roy Grimm
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Roy Grimm
1999-05-12 0:00 ` Roger Racine
1999-05-12 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-05-17 0:00 ` Richard D Riehle
1999-05-18 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-05-18 0:00 ` bglbv
1999-05-18 0:00 ` William B. Clodius
1999-05-17 0:00 ` Charlie McCutcheon
1999-05-17 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-05-17 0:00 ` Chris
1999-05-17 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-05-17 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-05-10 0:00 ` Dan Nagle
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Jean-Pierre Rosen
1999-05-11 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox