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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pdn!tscs!tct!chip From: chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Last Ada Diatribe for 90 Message-ID: <260A5116.3EDC@tct.uucp> Date: 23 Mar 90 16:38:45 GMT References: <19480@grebyn.com> <20600038@inmet> Organization: ComDev/TCT, Sarasota, FL List-Id: According to stt@inmet.inmet.com (S. Tucker Taft): >I am sure if you were to look inside the ANSI C standardization >effort, you would have found large numbers of perceived problems >with K&R C, and a standardization committee which did its >level best to address as many as them as was practical. I quite agree with Mr. Taft. The ANSI C committee did receive a very large number of change requests. However, I believe that Mr. Taft's comparison with C misses Ted's point in quoting Ada complaints. No one I respect, certainly no one on the ANSI C committee, has ever claimed that C is the be-all and end-all of programming languages. It is useful for many purposes, but not all. Thus no one is surprised or dismayed when people request added features for C. However, the impression that I (and, perhaps, Ted) have of the Ada push by DoD is that the entire *purpose* of Ada is to be the be-all and end-all of programming languages. Everything from the proverbial enbedded systems in fighter jets to the also-proverbial mainframe database is to be written in Ada. So, you see, the DoD has set up Ada on a very high pedestal. Ted was merely pointing out that the users of Ada have found it to be unworthy of its hype. In fact, I would go so far as to predict (a hush falls over the crowd)... no one language will ever meet Ada's goals. To claim otherwise for Ada or any language is mistaken at best, fraud at worst. >By and large, most [Ada review] >requests came from people who seriously want to continue using >Ada rather than some other language, but have run into some problem >or other which they would ideally like to see fixed. I suspect that most people who "want to continue using Ada" would drop it like a hot potato if the DoD weren't looking over their shoulder by requiring it (or planning to require it). That's just a suspicion, mind you, but it's certainly the way I'd feel. -- Chip Salzenberg at ComDev/TCT , "The Usenet, in a very real sense, does not exist."