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=1.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MISSING_DATE,
	MISSING_MID,MISSING_SUBJECT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
From: utzoo!watmath!watarts!bernie
Newsgroups: net.lang.ada
Title: Re: The Devil, Ada, and Tom Slone
Article-I.D.: watarts.1843
Posted: Fri May 20 10:13:04 1983
Received: Sat May 21 00:09:45 1983
References: cornell.4394
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>
Message-ID: <20200615230050.2NjCMidwfv2m6rrDnRarwXaFovHsQydS19itqu9BGig@z>

The only observation that I can wholeheartedly agree with is that
"Ada is a improvement over COBOL in many ways".
  The one thing that's said about Ada most often is that it's big.  It's a
*very* big and complex language, requiring a lot of time/space on a small
machine (if it will fit at all).  Since small machines are clearly the wave
of the future, Ada's part in the overall scheme of things seems questionable.
The observation that small machines with 32- and 64-bit architectures and
power comparable to Vaxen will soon be available changes thing very little;
Ada is *still* too big, and will have to be trimmed down if people are going
to use it for anything other than DoD contracts.
  Ada unquestionably has many nice features; however, I suspect we will see
these features appearing in other languages long before we will see Ada itself
in widespread use.
				--Bernie Roehl
				...decvax!watmath!watarts!bernie