From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 27 Jul 93 15:02:53 GMT From: iris.mbvlab.wpafb.af.mil!blackbird.afit.af.mil!news.usafa.af.mil!kirk!cwa rack@uunet.uu.net (Chris Warack ) Subject: Re: Office Naval Research seemingly not interested in Ada Message-ID: <233g2t$i5l@usafa2.usafa.af.mil> List-Id: I have the proceedings from another ONR workshop, the Third Annual Workshop Foundations of Real-Time Computing... While I cannot say that Ada was not mentioned (it was mentioned on at least one page of the proceedings), it certainly wasn't prominent. So what??? Look at it from this perspective: Here is some "stats" gleaned from the proceedings... Languages prominently discussed: FLEX Machines prominently discussed: HARTS, SMART caches Operating Systems prominently discussed: HARTS/OS, Spring Are any of these used outside of the research community? Languages mentioned on at least one page: Ada, C, ... The vast majority of the proceedings discussed algorithms, theories, methods and techniques applicable regardless of language or system. Most of these discussions don't bother to mention something as unimportant as which language was used in implementations. Bottom line: ONR/ARPA/DoD labs engage in research -- personal preference is as good a criteria as any for language selection in many research projects. Who cares? The result of the research independent of these "details" is the important part. I would be extremely unhappy to hear that the F-22 was coded primarily in C. I could care less what some researcher at MIT used on an ONR project. Opinions my own. -- Christopher A. Warack, Capt, USAF Computer Science Department, US Air Force Academy cwarack@kirk.usafa.af.mil (719) 472-2401