"Air Force study recommends scrapping Ada mandate",

"Air Force study recommends scrapping Ada mandate",

[The Right Reverend Colin James III]

from Military & Aerospace Electronics 4/96.

Emmett Paige abdicates Ada on page 25:

"Emmett Paige, the assistant secretary of defense for command, control,
communications and intelligence, is one of the Pentagon's chief Ada
advocates, yet he refused to enter the fray. "I will not get hung up on the
Ada comments as the study encompasses far more than Ada or any software
language," Paige said in a prepared statement." 
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Colin James III (The Rt Rev'd)  cjames@boss.bod.net

Harassment by email is a felony (Title 47 USC).
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Re: "Air Force study recommends scrapping Ada mandate",

[Ken Garlington]

The Right Reverend Colin James III wrote:
> 
> [a mischaracterization of an Emmett Paige quote]

Here's a quote from a message I just received from Emmett Paige.

IF THE GOVT FOOT THE BILL, FOR MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENTS,
IT WILL BE IN ADA. 

Doesn't exactly sound like an abdication of Ada to me.

Re: "Air Force study recommends scrapping Ada mandate",

[Dave Williamson]

Like the recent posting regarding the 777 and Ada, I am confused at
how the quoted text below justifies the subject line.  I see
absolutely no correlation between the quoted text and the statement
that Mr. Paige has abdicated Ada.  In the same vein, I could easily
state that Mr. Paige has no use for Eiffel using the quoted text and a
similar subject line.

Are we merely trying to invoke flame wars here, and provoke harassment
by email?

cjames@boss.bod.net (The Right Reverend Colin James III) wrote:

>from Military & Aerospace Electronics 4/96.

>Emmett Paige abdicates Ada on page 25:

>"Emmett Paige, the assistant secretary of defense for command, control,
>communications and intelligence, is one of the Pentagon's chief Ada
>advocates, yet he refused to enter the fray. "I will not get hung up on the
>Ada comments as the study encompasses far more than Ada or any software
>language," Paige said in a prepared statement." 
>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
>Colin James III (The Rt Rev'd)  cjames@boss.bod.net

>Harassment by email is a felony (Title 47 USC).
>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

"Subject:" (was: Re: Air Force study recommends ...)

[Norman H. Cohen]

In article <4kj19u$3ek@silver.ObjecTime.on.ca>,
davew@ObjecTime.on.ca (Dave Williamson) writes: 

|> Like the recent posting regarding the 777 and Ada, I am confused at
|> how the quoted text below justifies the subject line.  I see
|> absolutely no correlation between the quoted text and the statement
|> that Mr. Paige has abdicated Ada.

Of course not, and nobody who has heard Mr. Paige's comments about the
study in person could ever come to such a conclusion.

The writer of the post in question has a history of posting messages with
unsupported subject lines.  Perhaps it is because he has observed the
tenacity with which subject lines live on, even when the thread moves to
other topics.  I imagine he enjoys the ensuing flood of refutations to
his unsupported claims, all repeating those claims in the subject line
and all creating the impression (among those who scan a news reader's
list of topics and select only a few to read) of widespread support for
his claims.

That is why I changed the subject in this message.

--
Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com