comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ken Garlington <garlingtonke@lmtas.lmco.com>
Subject: Re: Is the "Ada mandate" being reconsidered?
Date: 1996/06/12
Date: 1996-06-12T00:00:00+00:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <31BE9DCD.1A2C@lmtas.lmco.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 4pk5sm$i7k@gde.GDEsystems.COM


Michael Levasseur wrote:
> 
> COTS - These movement to COTS hass been including move and
> more code that has been written in C++ as well 4GL stuff.

What does writing custom code in C++ or 4GL have to do with COTS?
(Note that, for many years, 4GL has been a DoD preference -- when
Ada is not possible. This isn't new.)

> The loss of credible compiler companies - As the number of credible
> compiler companies shinks and DoD software budgets continue to
> shink getting a vendor for the particular platform are harder and
> also more expensive.

However, when _I_ look at the data, the number of supported platforms 
continues to grow, and more platforms have free compilers available 
today than they did 5 years ago. Could you post the source of the data 
you're using to justify this statement?

> Ada has not and probably never will overcome
> the stigma of being developed by the Government.

Is there not an exquisite irony in posting this statement on the
Internet?

> Company Management - Many DoD companies now don't really worry
> about complying with the DoD directive.
> 
> DoD Management - The DoD lets the companies get away with this

This has been said since the beginning of Ada. The anecdotal
evidence in support of this doesn't appear to be any greater now
than it was 5 years ago. Why would this suddenly cause the "demise"
of Ada? (Interestingly, however, every time I see a service listing
their major software projects, the list of Ada projects continues
to grow...)

> Although Ada is better, C and C++ will
> probably be the winner.

No, obviously Visual Basic will be the winner. No wait, Java will be the
winner! No... :)

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"




  reply	other threads:[~1996-06-12  0:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1996-05-08  0:00 Is the "Ada mandate" being reconsidered? Howard Dodson
1996-05-08  0:00 ` Thomas C. Timberlake
1996-05-08  0:00 ` David Weller
1996-05-08  0:00 ` Tucker Taft
     [not found]   ` <31913863.446B9B3D@escmail.orl.mmc.com>
1996-05-10  0:00     ` Robert Munck
1996-05-13  0:00       ` Theodore E. Dennison
1996-05-13  0:00       ` Ken Garlington
1996-05-14  0:00         ` Robert Munck
1996-05-14  0:00           ` Tucker Taft
1996-05-17  0:00             ` Robert Munck
1996-06-03  0:00 ` Roy M. Bell
1996-06-09  0:00   ` Peggy Byers
1996-06-09  0:00     ` David Weller
1996-06-09  0:00     ` Robert Dewar
1996-06-10  0:00     ` Paul Whittington
1996-06-10  0:00     ` Ken Garlington
1996-06-10  0:00     ` James Krell
1996-06-11  0:00       ` Michael Levasseur
1996-06-12  0:00         ` Ken Garlington [this message]
1996-06-12  0:00         ` Theodore E. Dennison
1996-06-13  0:00           ` Michael Levasseur
1996-06-14  0:00             ` Theodore E. Dennison
1996-06-15  0:00               ` Robert Dewar
1996-06-17  0:00             ` Ken Garlington
1996-06-20  0:00             ` Joe Gwinn
1996-06-25  0:00               ` Bob Kitzberger
1996-06-10  0:00     ` Tucker Taft
1996-06-11  0:00 ` Jim Kingdon
1996-06-11  0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1996-06-12  0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1996-06-12  0:00   ` Tom Robinson
1996-06-12  0:00     ` Fergus Henderson
1996-06-13  0:00       ` Tom Robinson
1996-06-13  0:00         ` Robert Dewar
1996-06-18  0:00           ` Theodore E. Dennison
1996-06-18  0:00             ` Theodore E. Dennison
1996-06-13  0:00         ` Robert Dewar
1996-06-24  0:00         ` Carl Bowman
1996-06-13  0:00     ` Jon S Anthony
1996-06-13  0:00     ` Robert Dewar
1996-06-13  0:00     ` Tucker Taft
1996-06-14  0:00       ` Tom Robinson
     [not found]     ` <31DD5234.11CB@thomsoft.com>
1996-07-18  0:00       ` Front Ends (was: Re: Is the "Ada mandate" being reconsidered?) Tom Robinson
1996-06-13  0:00 ` Is the "Ada mandate" being reconsidered? Jon S Anthony
1996-06-14  0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1996-06-14  0:00 ` Jim Kingdon
1996-06-21  0:00   ` Richard Riehle
1996-06-22  0:00     ` Robert Dewar
1996-06-14  0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1996-07-19  0:00 ` Front Ends (was: Re: Is the "Ada mandate" being reconsidered?) Jon S Anthony
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1996-06-14  0:00 Is the "Ada mandate" being reconsidered? Mark Bell
1996-06-14  0:00 Mark Bell
1996-06-14  0:00 ` Kevin J. Weise
1996-06-17  0:00   ` Theodore E. Dennison
1996-06-18  0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-06-24  0:00   ` Michael Levasseur
1996-06-17  0:00 Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93
1996-06-19  0:00 ` Ken Garlington
1996-06-19  0:00 ` Jim Kingdon
1996-06-21  0:00 Bob Crispen
1996-06-25  0:00 ` Joe Gwinn
1996-06-25  0:00   ` Michael Feldman
1996-06-27  0:00     ` Joe Gwinn
1996-06-29  0:00       ` Robert Dewar
1996-07-01  0:00         ` Norman H. Cohen
1996-06-27  0:00 ` Bob Crispen
1996-06-27  0:00 ` Jim Kingdon
1996-06-28  0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1996-06-30  0:00 ` Nasser Abbasi
1996-07-03  0:00   ` Joe Gwinn
1996-07-08  0:00     ` Ken Garlington
1996-07-08  0:00     ` Bob Kitzberger
1996-07-10  0:00       ` Joe Gwinn
1996-07-10  0:00         ` David Emery
1996-07-11  0:00           ` Michael Feldman
1996-07-15  0:00             ` Brad Balfour
1996-07-11  0:00         ` James Rhodes
1996-07-11  0:00         ` Jim Chelini
1996-07-22  0:00           ` Joe Gwinn
1996-07-12  0:00       ` Jon S Anthony
1996-06-30  0:00 ` Ronald Cole
1996-06-30  0:00   ` Robert Dewar
1996-06-30  0:00     ` Richard Kenner
1996-07-12  0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
     [not found] <nhd91w250f.fsf@paralysys>
1996-07-16  0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox