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,d306affe395eadaa,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Robert C. Leif, Ph.D." Subject: Ada95 Should be a Multivolume ISO Standard. -- was Two ideas for Date: 1996/09/10 Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960910211737.006b5a88@mail.cts.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 179989305 sender: Ada programming language x-sender: rleif@mail.cts.com comments: To: John_Volan@DAYTON.SAIC.COM content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Date: 1996-09-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: From: Bob Leif, Ph.D. Ada_Med To: John_Volan et al. You Wrote ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- "More broadly, I'm also glad to see that there's some thought about allowing Ada95 to evolve even before ISO gets around to the next major revision. Nobody's perfect, and nobody's perfectly clairvoyant either, including the people who write language standards. But the ability to correct mistakes and adapt to new circumstances is a sign of good health. For this reason, I believe it's vital that there be some mechanism for discussing, experimenting, implementing, and sanctioning revisions and extensions to Ada95. But I disagree that this mechanism should be "informal" or "semi-recognized." There should be some formally-accepted way to perform corrective and adaptive maintenance on the Ada95 standard. Is there one? If there isn't, could somebody with some clout step in to fill the vacuum, perhaps a coalition between ACT and Intermetrics? Is this already the de facto situation?" --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The first step is to change Ada 95 from a single to a multivolume ISO standard. The specification of Ada presently is based on the waterfall model and occurs at periods greater than a decade. A multivolume standard would permit the classic software approach of divide and conquer. The spiral mode, which is the method of choice for most software development, should be applied to Ada. The second step is to employ some standard's group, such as the IEEE, to place its imprimatur on Provisional changes to Ada. I define Provisional to mean, this is our present design; but, we can NOT guarantee that it will stay in its present form. Experience may require that it be changed. My personal choice for the standard's group is ACM SigAda. I quite well realize that the ACM is presently not a standards organization. However, the ACM SigAda has the great advantage of being composed of Ada enthusiasts. Yours, Bob Leif