From: fedfil!news@uunet.uu.net (news)
Subject: Re: Why IBM is a detriment to non-Mandate Ada growth
Date: 26 Feb 93 03:42:59 GMT [thread overview]
Message-ID: <295@fedfil.UUCP> (raw)
In article <SRCTRAN.93Feb24103445@world.std.com>, srctran@world.std.com (Gregor
y Aharonian) writes:
> while none of the future standard bearers (such as Microsoft, Borland,
> Computer Associates, Novell, or Lotus) ignore Ada and aren't involved
> with DoD software engineering research activities? Seems a strange way
> to keep compatible with the world.
Microsoft and Borland ARE compatible with the world. It's DOD (actually the
small/unfortunate sections of DOD which do not manage to find waivers) which
are incompatible.
--
Ted Holden
HTE
next reply other threads:[~1993-02-26 3:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1993-02-26 3:42 news [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1993-02-24 15:34 Why IBM is a detriment to non-Mandate Ada growth Gregory Aharonian
1993-02-23 12:52 cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!firth
1993-02-23 0:23 Gregory Aharonian
[not found] ` <C2z4BB.FJ0@shellgate.shell.com>
1993-03-04 3:24 ` news
1993-03-04 13:22 ` Scott McCoy
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox