Re: Legislative Mandate for Ada

[sampson@cod.NOSC.MIL (Charles H. Sampson)]

In article <2455@sparko.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu () writes:
>In article <9700@as0c.sei.cmu.edu> bwb@sei.cmu.edu (Bruce Benson) writes:
>>
>>If the percentage doesn't approach 100 fast enough then they will mandate
>>mindless translations.
>Oh, Lord - I hope not! Seriously, I don't have a lot of inside information,
>but I really don't think this is what it's about. Do you have any serious
>info suggesting this mindlessness? (I realize that we're all cynics in this
>business, but fact and cynicism shouldn't be confused. Got facts?)

     I haven't seen any mandate yet, at any level, but expressions of inter-
est in mechanical (read mindless) translation from various languages to Ada
keep cropping up in the part of the Navy that I work with.  Usually some
software house is trying to sell the Navy on the benefits of transitioning
to Ada and the wonderful tool they have to aid that transition.  I've had
to critique a few of these efforts.  The translated Ada was appalling, even
when the proponents were claiming that the program should be maintained (for
decades) in Ada rather than its original, natural, language.  These efforts
always seem to be presented as quck-and-dirty proofs-of-concept, with pro-
mises that the final product will be truly wonderful, as soon as a lot of
our tax money is spent.

                            Charlie