Re: long term viability of Ada

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Alan Brain]

Greg A Barnett wrote:
> 
>  They
> have one argument I can't refute and I'm looking for help.  They claim
> that since the DoD is abandoning Ada (their words, not mine) and since
> there is very little commercial use of Ada in the US (again their
> words), Ada is a dead language that won't be around in 5-10 years. Does
> anyone have a crystal ball that sees 5-10 years in the future?  What are
> the projections for market share, number of projects written in Ada,
> dollar value of Ada contracts, etc.?
> 
> BTW, I don't expect this will change their minds, they've made their
> decision and facts would just confuse the issue.  Sigh!  I could use
> some encouragment.

1. US DoD is not 'abandoning' Ada, though it's not exactly being
terribly encouraging it either. See AIA report. I think it's on HBAP.
2. Avionics : Ada is being used increasingly in aviation, railways etc.
There is no chance whatsoever that it will be abandoned in 5 years, and
will
still be around in 30 years, as will COBOL I might add.
3. Very little commercial use in the US - this may be true. Europe and
Japan, and for that matter Australia, is another matter.
4. As for C++... which C++? There are many different dielects of it,
and, like K&R C, in 5-10 years any particular compiler is likely to be
rendered obsolete by an ANSI standardisation, if they ever get around to
it.

But as for documents, hard evidence.... please tell me when you get it,
as I'd like to see it myself.
 
----------------------      <> <>    How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain|      xxxxx       Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia |  xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
---------------------- o OO*O^^^^O*OO o oo     oo oo     oo  
                    By pulling Maerklin Wagons, in 1/220 Scale

long term viability of Ada

[Greg A Barnett]

I attended a meeting today to have the engineers on a new program
explain how/why they choose C++ over Ada95.  The project will be using
CORBA and Java (language, browser, virtual machine - I'm not sure,
I don't think they are either).  The arguments given were the typical
ones: C++ has better, cheaper tools; C++ compilers are cheaper; everyone
else is using it; CORBA is written in C, therefore..., C++ code is more
efficient, etc., etc., etc.  I can easily refute these with the good
ammo I've seen at the AdaIC, HBAP and posted in this news group.  They
have one argument I can't refute and I'm looking for help.  They claim
that since the DoD is abandoning Ada (their words, not mine) and since
there is very little commercial use of Ada in the US (again their
words), Ada is a dead language that won't be around in 5-10 years. Does
anyone have a crystal ball that sees 5-10 years in the future?  What are
the projections for market share, number of projects written in Ada,
dollar value of Ada contracts, etc.?

BTW, I don't expect this will change their minds, they've made their
decision and facts would just confuse the issue.  Sigh!  I could use
some encouragment.

-- 
Greg A. Barnett
Lockheed Martin Tactical Defense Systems - Akron

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <324219D1.15FFEF33@bright.net>, Greg A Barnett <barnett@bright.net> writes:

> have one argument I can't refute and I'm looking for help.  They claim
> that since the DoD is abandoning Ada (their words, not mine) and since
> there is very little commercial use of Ada in the US (again their
> words), Ada is a dead language that won't be around in 5-10 years. Does

Organizations which must maintain old code are more likely to stay
in business if that code is of a fashion that promotes maintainability.

It is true that sovereign nations can withstand much greater
economic trauma than commercial organizations, so those
organizations which subsist on government contracts may be
able to get away with inefficiencies better than the rest
of us..

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Tucker Taft]

Greg A Barnett (barnett@bright.net) wrote:
: ... They claim
: that since the DoD is abandoning Ada (their words, not mine) and since
: there is very little commercial use of Ada in the US (again their
: words), Ada is a dead language that won't be around in 5-10 years. Does
: anyone have a crystal ball that sees 5-10 years in the future?  What are
: the projections for market share, number of projects written in Ada,
: dollar value of Ada contracts, etc.?

The Ada market continues to grow.

You might have them listen in on comp.lang.ada, or visit the 
lglwww.epfl.ch/Ada website to see how active the Ada market is these
days.  C++ is the language that seems to be somewhat more under attack
at the moment, with C9X and Cobol9X both adding classes, Java grabbing 
the Internet, and Ada 95 continuing in the high reliability business.

If they are interested in CORBA, they should certainly talk to IONA and/or
Objective Interface Systems.  The Ada 95/CORBA story is quite impressive
right now.

: BTW, I don't expect this will change their minds, they've made their
: decision and facts would just confuse the issue.  Sigh!  I could use
: some encouragment.

: -- 
: Greg A. Barnett
: Lockheed Martin Tactical Defense Systems - Akron

-Tucker Taft   stt@inmet.com   http://www.inmet.com/~stt/
Intermetrics, Inc.  Cambridge, MA  USA

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Shayne Flint]

Alan Brain wrote:
> 
> Greg A Barnett wrote:
> >
> >  They
> > have one argument I can't refute and I'm looking for help.  They claim
> > that since the DoD is abandoning Ada (their words, not mine) and since
> > there is very little commercial use of Ada in the US (again their
> > words), Ada is a dead language that won't be around in 5-10 years. Does
> > anyone have a crystal ball that sees 5-10 years in the future?  What are
> > the projections for market share, number of projects written in Ada,
> > dollar value of Ada contracts, etc.?
> >
> > BTW, I don't expect this will change their minds, they've made their
> > decision and facts would just confuse the issue.  Sigh!  I could use
> > some encouragment.
> 
> 1. US DoD is not 'abandoning' Ada, though it's not exactly being
> terribly encouraging it either. See AIA report. I think it's on HBAP.
> 2. Avionics : Ada is being used increasingly in aviation, railways etc.
> There is no chance whatsoever that it will be abandoned in 5 years, and
> will
> still be around in 30 years, as will COBOL I might add.
> 3. Very little commercial use in the US - this may be true. Europe and
> Japan, and for that matter Australia, is another matter.
> 4. As for C++... which C++? There are many different dielects of it,
> and, like K&R C, in 5-10 years any particular compiler is likely to be
> rendered obsolete by an ANSI standardisation, if they ever get around to
> it.
> 
> But as for documents, hard evidence.... please tell me when you get it,
> as I'd like to see it myself.
> 

mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu recently mailed a list of some commercial projects
using Ada.
The list included the Air traffic control systems of more than 25
countries, most
Boeing aircraft (747, 767, 777 etc), most Airbus aircraft, many railway
systems etc.
These kinds of systems will be alive and well for more than ten years. 

The main point however, is that any C/C++ compiler you choose 
today will not be around in 5-10 years. Ada95 is standardised and will
be 
stable for a long while. Contrary or popular belief, Ada compilers are
cheap, readily
available, and of high quality.

My view is that the more people struggle with C++ etc. the better off
we Ada users are. We will continue to produce better software more
quickly. Our 
software will continue to be portable across platforms for many years to
come, and 
with products such as AppletMagic (from Intermetrics) and ObjectAda
(from Thomson 
Software Products) - we can ride the Java bandwagon using an ISO
standard language
and our existing body of Ada code (and when the wheels fall off the
bandwagon, we
will still have our Ada code). The C/C++/Java people will be chopping
and changing,
arguing about language features, inventing new languages and dialects,
training and 
retraining, and maintaining systems written in long forgotten dialects
of languages 
for years to come.

We will still be using ISO Ada.

Why would you use anything else but Ada? It's beyond me, but I don't
really care 
because I know I have a commercial advantage in using Ada.

--------------------------------------------------------------
-- Shayne Flint                          Promoting Ada as the
-- Ainslie Software Pty Limited          programming language
-- Australia                             for serious software
--------------------------------------------------------------

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Tucker Taft]

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.

Greg A Barnett (barnett@bright.net) wrote:
: ... They claim
: that since the DoD is abandoning Ada (their words, not mine) and since
: there is very little commercial use of Ada in the US (again their
: words), Ada is a dead language that won't be around in 5-10 years. Does
: anyone have a crystal ball that sees 5-10 years in the future?  What are
: the projections for market share, number of projects written in Ada,
: dollar value of Ada contracts, etc.?

The Ada market continues to grow.

You might have them listen in on comp.lang.ada, or visit the 
lglwww.epfl.ch/Ada website to see how active the Ada market is these
days.  C++ is the language that seems to be somewhat more under attack
at the moment, with C9X and Cobol9X both adding classes, Java grabbing 
the Internet, and Ada 95 continuing in the high reliability business.

If they are interested in CORBA, they should certainly talk to IONA and/or
Objective Interface Systems.  The Ada 95/CORBA story is quite impressive
right now.

: BTW, I don't expect this will change their minds, they've made their
: decision and facts would just confuse the issue.  Sigh!  I could use
: some encouragment.

: -- 
: Greg A. Barnett
: Lockheed Martin Tactical Defense Systems - Akron

-Tucker Taft   stt@inmet.com   http://www.inmet.com/~stt/
Intermetrics, Inc.  Cambridge, MA  USA

Re: long term viability of Ada

[DeanNelson]

IMHO,

It'll take a lot more than 5-10 years to flush out the Ada out of all of
the DoD computers. It'll be here for a long time, although, maybe not as
"popular" as C/C++, but maybe on level of Fortran (in 10-20 years though).



Dean Nelson
Lockheed Martin
Las Vegas, Nv

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Ken Garlington]

DeanNelson wrote:
> 
> IMHO,
> 
> It'll take a lot more than 5-10 years to flush out the Ada out of all of
> the DoD computers. It'll be here for a long time, although, maybe not as
> "popular" as C/C++, but maybe on level of Fortran (in 10-20 years though).

In particular, it will be hard to "flush out" Ada, given that _new_ Ada
keeps entering the DoD computers all of the time. Even if you discount upgrades 
to current-generation weapon systems (e.g. F-16 Modular Mission Computer), and 
weapon systems just now getting ready to enter service (e.g. F-22), there's still 
new weapon systems just beginning development that are planning to use Ada. See, 
for example:

  http://www.jast.mil/jacdd.html

to get a document describing the use of Ada on the Joint Strike Fighter program.

> 
> Dean Nelson
> Lockheed Martin
> Las Vegas, Nv

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Ken Garlington]

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller.

DeanNelson wrote:
> 
> IMHO,
> 
> It'll take a lot more than 5-10 years to flush out the Ada out of all of
> the DoD computers. It'll be here for a long time, although, maybe not as
> "popular" as C/C++, but maybe on level of Fortran (in 10-20 years though).

In particular, it will be hard to "flush out" Ada, given that _new_ Ada
keeps entering the DoD computers all of the time. Even if you discount upgrades 
to current-generation weapon systems (e.g. F-16 Modular Mission Computer), and 
weapon systems just now getting ready to enter service (e.g. F-22), there's still 
new weapon systems just beginning development that are planning to use Ada. See, 
for example:

  http://www.jast.mil/jacdd.html

to get a document describing the use of Ada on the Joint Strike Fighter program.

> 
> Dean Nelson
> Lockheed Martin
> Las Vegas, Nv

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"

Re: long term viability of Ada

[nasser]

>
>The Ada market continues to grow.
>

I don't see this. Have you looked at the help wanted Ads in the Sunday
papers lately?
 
In the commercial sector in the US there is almost no one using Ada.

Ada is used mostly in DOD related software/real-time/embedded type
of application.

I believe Ada is a better/safer language than C/C++, but if no one uses
it (other than few defense companies), it does not really matter how good
it is (from the point of view of getting a job in it), why go into the 
pains of finding  work in Ada in the US, and all that security 
clearance/interrogations thing one has to go through just to get the 
privilege to use it, when C/C++ jobs are all over the place and every 
where you want them and at any time, and they pay better too.

When I retire in about 40 years (Ok, may be in 35 years :), I'll code in Ada 
just for the fun of it, but meanwhile I'll use C/C++ because that where 
the jobs are. 

Nasser

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Dave Wood]

> Greg A Barnett <barnett@bright.net> wrote in article
> <324219D1.15FFEF33@bright.net>...

> > They claim
> > that since the DoD is abandoning Ada (their words, not mine) and since
> > there is very little commercial use of Ada in the US (again their
> > words), Ada is a dead language that won't be around in 5-10 years. 

"Commercial use" is a very broad category.  In some segments, Ada
is well used, in others it is a tiny niche in the US.  In any event, 
Ada is a long way from being dead.  She's had a pretty bad head
cold for the past couple of years, but she's now feeling much better
and ready to go back to work.

In fact, we've noted an increasing trend in people looking to move
*from* C++ *to* Ada 95.  Right now, I would consider this to be
essentially anecdotal because at this point only a few true Ada 95
compilers have hit the market.  An evaluation at this time next 
year would provide a much more reliable barometer of the long-term
prospects for Ada, in my opinion, both because there will be more
Ada 95 compilers available, and because the ones currently 
available will have been around longer.

-- Dave Wood
-- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
-- Thomson Software Products
-- http://www.thomsoft.com

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Jerry Petrey]

nasser@apldbio.com wrote:
> 
> >
> >The Ada market continues to grow.
> >
> 
> I don't see this. Have you looked at the help wanted Ads in the Sunday
> papers lately?
> 
> In the commercial sector in the US there is almost no one using Ada.
> 
> Ada is used mostly in DOD related software/real-time/embedded type
> of application.
> 
> I believe Ada is a better/safer language than C/C++, but if no one uses
> it (other than few defense companies), it does not really matter how good
> it is (from the point of view of getting a job in it), why go into the
> pains of finding  work in Ada in the US, and all that security
> clearance/interrogations thing one has to go through just to get the
> privilege to use it, when C/C++ jobs are all over the place and every
> where you want them and at any time, and they pay better too.
> 
> When I retire in about 40 years (Ok, may be in 35 years :), I'll code in Ada
> just for the fun of it, but meanwhile I'll use C/C++ because that where
> the jobs are.
> 
> Nasser


Anyone who relies on the Sunday paper for their source of jobs 
deserves to be stuck with C :-)  There are a lot of high paying
Ada jobs around (note that I'm speaking from a contractor's viewpoint)
but they usually aren't found in the newspaper.  Many are in the
defense business but quite a few are not.  There might be a number
of reasons for choosing not to learn Ada but lack of jobs is not
one of them.


-- 
======================================================================
== Jerry Petrey  - Consultant Software Engineer - Member Team Ada   ==
==                  Rockwell Collins Commercial Avionics Group      ==
==                  "a Commercial company using Ada"                ==
==                  Melbourne, FL   email: gdp@mlb.cca.rockwell.com ==
======================================================================

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <3245AFBF.3E28@thomsoft.com>, Dave Wood <dpw@thomsoft.com> writes:

> In fact, we've noted an increasing trend in people looking to move
> *from* C++ *to* Ada 95.  Right now, I would consider this to be
> essentially anecdotal because at this point only a few true Ada 95
> compilers have hit the market.

Dave can count sales, but for the rest of us one metric might be
to see bookstores briskly selling many volumes entitled "Ada for
C++ Programmers" or similar.

Larry Kilgallen

Re: long term viability of Ada

[bourass]

Nasser
> 
>In the commercial sector in the US there is almost no one using Ada.
>

Well, now, that is their big mistake isn't it?

A nice, inexpensive Ada for popular platforms like Windows, OS/2 and Mac would
go a long way to changing that trend.

Regards,

Greg Bourassa

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Byron Kauffman]

bourass@ibm.net wrote:
> 
> Nasser
> >
> >In the commercial sector in the US there is almost no one using Ada.
> >
> 
> Well, now, that is their big mistake isn't it?
> 
> A nice, inexpensive Ada for popular platforms like Windows, OS/2 and Mac would
> go a long way to changing that trend.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Greg Bourassa

Maybe I'm out of touch, but $100 (for Thomson's ActiveAda) seems pretty 
'inexpensive' to me...

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Jon S Anthony]

In article <527bjl$245q@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> bourass@ibm.net writes:

> Nasser
> > 
> >In the commercial sector in the US there is almost no one using Ada.
> >
> 
> Well, now, that is their big mistake isn't it?
>
> A nice, inexpensive Ada for popular platforms like Windows, OS/2
> and Mac would go a long way to changing that trend.

Well, at least for Windows (95/NT), ObjectAda from Thomson certainly
seems to fit that requirement.

[[If you can and don't mind "futzing" about, GNAT does the same for OS/2
(and now the Mac...)]]


/Jon
-- 
Jon Anthony
Organon Motives, Inc.
1 Williston Road, Suite 4
Belmont, MA 02178

617.484.3383
jsa@organon.com

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Michael Feldman]

In article <527bjl$245q@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net>,  <bourass@ibm.net> wrote:
>
>A nice, inexpensive Ada for popular platforms like Windows, OS/2 and Mac would
>go a long way to changing that trend.
>

You asked for it, you got it!:-)

Currently available compilers for the platforms you name range in
quality from nice to very nice, and in price from free to inexpensive.
Have a look at any of the major Ada web sites for details on GNAT
(GNU Ada 95, which is _free_ and available for all the platforms
named above and many more) and other proprietary compilers, especially
the ObjectAda series from Thomson.

Indicative prices are on http://www.acm.org/sigada/education. These are
educational prices, but you'd be quite amazed at the single-copy commercial
prices these days. Contact the individual vendors for details.

Mike Feldman
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael B. Feldman -  chair, SIGAda Education Working Group
Professor, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
The George Washington University -  Washington, DC 20052 USA
202-994-5919 (voice) - 202-994-0227 (fax) 
http://www.seas.gwu.edu/faculty/mfeldman
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Pork is all that money the government gives the other guys.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WWW: http://lglwww.epfl.ch/Ada/ or http://info.acm.org/sigada/education
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Frank Manning]

In article <524sb9$t5g@lex.zippo.com> nasser@apldbio.com (Nasser)
writes:

> I don't see this. Have you looked at the help wanted Ads in the Sunday
> papers lately?
> 
> In the commercial sector in the US there is almost no one using Ada.

This is one of Greg's favorite arguments. I question whether you can
draw any valid conclusions on this subject by studying classified ads.

According to one study conducted in a "typical" large and small
American city (San Francisco and Salt Lake City), 75-85% of the
employers did not hire *any* employees through want ads during an
*entire year*.

I personally don't recall ever getting a job through classified ads,
including one that involved Ada programming. How many programmers do
you know who got their job via a classified ad? How did you get your
job?

-- Frank Manning
-- Chair, AIAA-Tucson Section

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Robert Dewar]

Jerry said

"Anyone who relies on the Sunday paper for their source of jobs
deserves to be stuck with C :-)  There are a lot of high paying
Ada jobs around (note that I'm speaking from a contractor's viewpoint)
but they usually aren't found in the newspaper.  Many are in the
defense business but quite a few are not.  There might be a number
of reasons for choosing not to learn Ada but lack of jobs is not
one of them."

Actually I notice a huge increase in job postings to comp.lang.ada. If they
get much more frequent, they will start to become a nuisance :-) :-)

Re: long term viability of Ada

[nasser]

In article <529n5f$k68@news.ccit.arizona.edu>, frank@bigdog.engr.arizona.edu 
says...
>
>In article <524sb9$t5g@lex.zippo.com> nasser@apldbio.com (Nasser)
>writes:
>
>> I don't see this. Have you looked at the help wanted Ads in the Sunday
>> papers lately?
>> 
>> In the commercial sector in the US there is almost no one using Ada.
>
>This is one of Greg's favorite arguments.

> I question whether you can
>draw any valid conclusions on this subject by studying classified ads.
>

Really?  If you see 1000 ads asking for skill A, and 1 asking for skill B,
are you saying I can't draw any conclusion from this? when I said the
Sunday classified Ads, I did not mean literally the Sunday classified Ads, I
meant it as a metaphor to mean popular ads, stuff you see on newsgroups, 
technical magazines, jobs magazines, and the Sunday papers, those sorts of 
things.

>According to one study conducted in a "typical" large and small
>American city (San Francisco and Salt Lake City), 75-85% of the
>employers did not hire *any* employees through want ads during an
>*entire year*.
>

So? the 75-80% would apply to both the C/C++ crowds as well to the Ada ones.
75% of those who apply to the Ada job through the classified ads do not 
get considered, and also 75% of those who apply to the C/C++ jobs through 
the classified ads do not get the job. so we are back to square one.

>I personally don't recall ever getting a job through classified ads,
>including one that involved Ada programming. How many programmers do
>you know who got their job via a classified ad? How did you get your
>job?
>

My first ever job was with EDS , yes, go Perot :) , and that was through 
a Sunday classified Ad. I spend 4 great years there. My second one was also 
through a Sunday classified ad, that was with Digital Equip Corp (DEC). I 
spend a fun 5 years there, my third job was from a classified Ad with 
Qualcomm Inc. , another fine company. So, Are you happy now ? or do you want 
me to tell you the rest of my life story :)

Ok, now its your turn, tell us how you got your jobs !

Any way, what exactly are we arguing about here? becuase I love to argue,
but first I need to know what the argument is about (it sort of makes
it easier ).

thanks,
Nasser
---
Nasser Abbasi. Perkin Elmer - Applied BioSystem division. 
Development of DNA and Protein analysis software. C/C++/UNIX.
email:  nasser@apldbio.com   MSEE, MSCS, MSCE, Fide chess master (FM).

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." 
Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93]

Larry Kilgallen <kilgallen@EISNER.DECUS.ORG> writes:
>In article <3245AFBF.3E28@thomsoft.com>, Dave Wood <dpw@thomsoft.com> writes:
>
>> In fact, we've noted an increasing trend in people looking to move
>> *from* C++ *to* Ada 95.  Right now, I would consider this to be
>> essentially anecdotal because at this point only a few true Ada 95
>> compilers have hit the market.
>
>Dave can count sales, but for the rest of us one metric might be
>to see bookstores briskly selling many volumes entitled "Ada for
>C++ Programmers" or similar.
>
    Probably the best indicator of long-term viability would be the
    number of college level courses being taught which utilize Ada95.
    People promote the technology they are most familiar with and as
    students emerge from school knowing Ada95, they'll likely sell
    their bosses on it.

    MDC

Marin David Condic, Senior Computer Engineer    ATT:        561.796.8997
M/S 731-96                                      Technet:    796.8997
Pratt & Whitney, GESP                           Fax:        561.796.4669
P.O. Box 109600                                 Internet:   CONDICMA@PWFL.COM
West Palm Beach, FL 33410-9600                  Internet:   CONDIC@FLINET.COM
===============================================================================
   "The Sexual Revolution is over and the microbes won."

        --  P. J. O'Rourke
===============================================================================

long term viability of Ada

[Mark Bell]

22-Sep-96 19:23	nasser@apldbio.com writes

>privilege to use it, when C/C++ jobs are all over the place and every 
>where you want them and at any time, and they pay better too.
  
C/C++ jobs pay BETTER than Ada ???  What a joke...

You obviously have never looked at the Ada market have you ??

I've said it before on the newgroup, and I'll say it again...If
you're willing to relocate (and that's not really necessary after
a while), from *PERSONAL* experience over the past 15 years, I've
NEVER had a problem finding good paying and interesting Ada
jobs !!

What's more, rarely have I ever used the Want Ads of the Sunday
Paper...

If you want to stay in one area, then diversify, be proficient in
C,C++, and Ada, and know more than just how to crank out code...

Regards






Mark S. Bell                           412-268-7925 (Voice)
Software Engineering Institute         412-268-5758 (Fax)
Carnegie Mellon University             ** These are my opinions, 
4500 Fifth Ave, Pittsburgh PA.,15213      not those of the SEI or CMU **

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Ken Garlington]

Alan Brain wrote:
> 
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> 
> > Dave can count sales, but for the rest of us one metric might be
> > to see bookstores briskly selling many volumes entitled "Ada for
> > C++ Programmers" or similar.
> 
> But a similar metric would give misleading results:
> There are NO "Secrets of the Ada Masters" books - mainly because one
> of the prime aims of Ada is to make Gurus unneccessary.
> Thera are no "Ada for Dummies" books - yet maybe there should be.

Here's another useless metric, related to the bookstore theme: I
recently received a mailing from the Association of Computing Machinery
on new books for object-oriented stuff. Two Ada (95) books were listed 
(in small type). Three books on Dylan were listed (big flashy graphics 
on their own page). Therefore, clearly Dylan is the more widely-used 
language.

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Ken Garlington]

nasser@apldbio.com wrote:
> 
> >
> >The Ada market continues to grow.
> >
> 
> I don't see this. Have you looked at the help wanted Ads in the Sunday
> papers lately?

Have you looked at the national help wanted ads in Aviation Week, even 
for the commercial software jobs? Lots of Ada in there...

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Alan Brain]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:

> Dave can count sales, but for the rest of us one metric might be
> to see bookstores briskly selling many volumes entitled "Ada for
> C++ Programmers" or similar.

But a similar metric would give misleading results:
There are NO "Secrets of the Ada Masters" books - mainly because one
of the prime aims of Ada is to make Gurus unneccessary.
Thera are no "Ada for Dummies" books - yet maybe there should be.

----------------------      <> <>    How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain|      xxxxx       Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia |  xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
---------------------- o OO*O^^^^O*OO o oo     oo oo     oo  
                    By pulling Maerklin Wagons, in 1/220 Scale

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Byron Kauffman]

Byron Kauffman wrote:
 
> Maybe I'm out of touch, but $100 (for Thomson's ActiveAda) seems pretty
> 'inexpensive' to me...

Of course, I meant ObjectAda...

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Ralph Paul]

Dave Wood <dpw@thomsoft.com> writes:

[ snip ]
> In fact, we've noted an increasing trend in people looking to move
> *from* C++ *to* Ada 95.  Right now, I would consider this to be
> essentially anecdotal because at this point only a few true Ada 95
> compilers have hit the market.  An evaluation at this time next 
> year would provide a much more reliable barometer of the long-term
> prospects for Ada, in my opinion, both because there will be more
> Ada 95 compilers available, and because the ones currently 
> available will have been around longer.

In fact I have seen a comment on comp.lang.modula2 that Stoney Brook
( spelling ?) is also developping their own new Ada95 compiler.
( They do/did have a fairly popular Modula-2 compiler for PC's. )
     
I think this goes to show that other companies then the traditional 
Ada supporters are really looking into Ada95 and see it as a good 
( maybe even better ) alternative to the current standards ( C/C++, ...)

I hope that this will become a trend not just for Windows but also for
other ( OS/2, Be ) systems (:-).
 
CU,

Ralph Paul

	paul@aem.umn.edu
or	ralph@ifr.luftahrt.uni-stuttgart.de

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Dave Wood]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> 
> In article <3245AFBF.3E28@thomsoft.com>, Dave Wood <dpw@thomsoft.com> writes:
> 
> > In fact, we've noted an increasing trend in people looking to move
> > *from* C++ *to* Ada 95.  Right now, I would consider this to be
> > essentially anecdotal because at this point only a few true Ada 95
> > compilers have hit the market.
> 
> Dave can count sales, but for the rest of us one metric might be
> to see bookstores briskly selling many volumes entitled "Ada for
> C++ Programmers" or similar.
> 
> Larry Kilgallen

Well, Simon Johnston needs to finish writing that book first!

:)

-- Dave Wood
-- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
-- Thomson Software Products
-- http://www.thomsoft.com

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <96092412370174@psavax.pwfl.com>, "Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93" <condicma@PWFL.COM> writes:

>     Probably the best indicator of long-term viability would be the
>     number of college level courses being taught which utilize Ada95.
>     People promote the technology they are most familiar with and as
>     students emerge from school knowing Ada95, they'll likely sell
>     their bosses on it.

An excellent point.

I hereby forgive the academics on the newsgroup for all those posts
about "curriculum" which made my eyes glaze over :-)

Larry Kilgallen

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Frank Manning]

In article <529vd7$h9l@lex.zippo.com> nasser@apldbio.com writes:

>In article <529n5f$k68@news.ccit.arizona.edu>, frank@bigdog.engr.arizona.edu 
>says...
>
>> I question whether you can
>> draw any valid conclusions on this subject by studying classified ads.
>>
>
> Really?  If you see 1000 ads asking for skill A, and 1 asking for skill B,
> are you saying I can't draw any conclusion from this? 

You can draw the conclusion that 1000 ads are asking for skill A and
one is asking for skill B. Beyond that, what?

Does that tell me there are 1000 times as many workers using skill A
compared to skill B? No. The ratio may be greater or less than 1000.
Maybe by a large amount. Who knows?

-- Frank Manning
-- Chair, AIAA-Tucson Section

Re: long term viability of Ada

[nasser]

In article <32498FDD.6F13@lmtas.lmco.com>, Ken says...
>
>nasser@apldbio.com wrote:
>> 
>> >
>> >The Ada market continues to grow.
>> >
>> 
>> I don't see this. Have you looked at the help wanted Ads in the Sunday
>> papers lately?
>
>Have you looked at the national help wanted ads in Aviation Week, even 
>for the commercial software jobs? Lots of Ada in there...
>


But that's my point. Ada is limited to this small market right now. 
Avionics, real-time embedded defense related software. This market 
itself is important but small compared to the whole universe of software. 

Ada should be used in other types of applications, but it is not.  And this 
is what is hurting Ada from becoming main stream language. Hopefully this 
will change with time.

If people do not know about Ada, people will not choose to use it, and for
people to know about ada, they need to use it.  

Actually I feel guilty in this myself, there are few languages I'd like
to know more about but never seem to have the time to learn them: Modula3 and
smalltalk.

I think every programmer should try to put aside few hours a week (1-2 hours) 
to read about/learn/study a different language than the one they are using in 
their main work.

oh boy, I sure feel very wise today :)

Nasser
--
Nasser Abbasi. Perkin Elmer - Applied BioSystem division. 
Development of DNA and Protein analysis software. C/C++/UNIX.
email:  nasser@apldbio.com   MSEE, MSCS, MSCE, Fide chess master (FM).

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." 
Thomas Watson,  chairman of IBM, 1943

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Ken Garlington]

nasser@apldbio.com wrote:
> 
> In article <32498FDD.6F13@lmtas.lmco.com>, Ken says...
> >
> >nasser@apldbio.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >The Ada market continues to grow.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I don't see this. Have you looked at the help wanted Ads in the Sunday
> >> papers lately?
> >
> >Have you looked at the national help wanted ads in Aviation Week, even
> >for the commercial software jobs? Lots of Ada in there...
> >
> 
> But that's my point. Ada is limited to this small market right now.
> Avionics, real-time embedded defense related software. This market
> itself is important but small compared to the whole universe of software.

Go read the ads in Aviation Week. They aren't limited to real-time embedded defense 
software.

If you mean, is Ada used routinely for business systems? Not as much as COBOL.
Numerical algorithms? I suspect FORTRAN still has a lot of fans here. I can't think
of a single language that's dominant in _all_ domains. If that's your definition
of "main stream," then every language is in trouble.

> Ada should be used in other types of applications, but it is not.

However, if you read the information on the Ada servers, you see it is used in many 
places other than the narrow field you describe. Avionics and non-avionics, 
real-time and non-real-time, embedded and non-embedded, defense and commercial.

The real point is: what is the _perception_ of Ada use? How it's actually used is 
less important than how many people out there _know_ about its wide range of uses.
As long as you continue to bemoan the fiction that Ada only gets used for DoD 
avionics, you continue to perpetuate the problem.

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Stephen M O'Shaughnessy]

In article <529vd7$h9l@lex.zippo.com>, nasser@apldbio.com says...

>Ok, now its your turn, tell us how you got your jobs !
>
Not through classified ads.  None of the people I have interviewed
in the last 15 years came through the classified's either.

I sent a resume to the personnel office.

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Uri Raz]

frank@bigdog.engr.arizona.edu (Frank Manning) wrote:
>In article <529vd7$h9l@lex.zippo.com> nasser@apldbio.com writes:
>>In article <529n5f$k68@news.ccit.arizona.edu>, frank@bigdog.engr.arizona.edu 
>>says...
>>
>>> I question whether you can
>>> draw any valid conclusions on this subject by studying classified ads.
>>>
>>
>> Really?  If you see 1000 ads asking for skill A, and 1 asking for skill B,
>> are you saying I can't draw any conclusion from this? 
>
> You can draw the conclusion that 1000 ads are asking for skill A and
> one is asking for skill B. Beyond that, what?
>
> Does that tell me there are 1000 times as many workers using skill A
> compared to skill B? No. The ratio may be greater or less than 1000.
> Maybe by a large amount. Who knows?
>
  You can conclude as following :
   1. The demand for skill A within companies is greater then offered by
      people within those companies.
   2. The demand for skill B within companies is satisfied by people
      within those companies.
   3. The chances of one to find a job are greatly enhanced if he acquires
      skill A, but are not if he acquires skill B.

  This would not indicate anything about the usage of the skill, as the ads
  only indicate the difference between how many people with the skill are
  needed and how many people with the skill are already working.

  e.g. there are many more lines of code written in f77 or cobol then there
  are lines of code written in any of the new languages (JAVA, HTML), but
  the demand for programmers in the old languages is low (the code is stable,
  positions already filled in past years, etc), while the demand for
  programmers in the new languages is high (as jobs are created, but not
  many people can yet do them).

  I dont think that anything but a large survey (in both area and time) could
  say how many lines of code in various languages was/is/will be developed,
  how many programmers were/are/will be needed to code in each language and
  say how viable those languages are.

 Uri Raz.

 +---------+--------------------+-------+-----+-----+
 | Uri Raz | uraz@iil.intel.com |  Noir | :-) | :-( |
 |   All opinions are mine. Others may share them.  |
 +--------------------------------------------------+

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Simon Johnston]

Dave Wood wrote:

> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> >
> > In article <3245AFBF.3E28@thomsoft.com>, Dave Wood =
<dpw@thomsoft.com> writes:
> >
> > > In fact, we've noted an increasing trend in people looking to move
> > > *from* C++ *to* Ada 95.  Right now, I would consider this to be
> > > essentially anecdotal because at this point only a few true Ada 95
> > > compilers have hit the market.
> >
> > Dave can count sales, but for the rest of us one metric might be
> > to see bookstores briskly selling many volumes entitled "Ada for
> > C++ Programmers" or similar.
> >
> > Larry Kilgallen
>=20
> Well, Simon Johnston needs to finish writing that book first!

Ok, Ok, Final draft has now been sent to Addison Wesley. We now hit =
copy-edit and production! Unfortunately this means I no longer have any =
excuse for not doing all that decorating thats been waiting for ages. :(
=20
> :)
>=20
> -- Dave Wood
> -- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
> -- Thomson Software Products
> -- http://www.thomsoft.com
>=20
>=20
with StandardDisclaimer; use StandardDisclaimer;
package Sig is
--,----------------------------------------------------------------------=
---.
--|Simon K. Johnston - Development Engineer (C++/Ada95) |ICL Retail =
Systems |
--|-----------------------------------------------------|3/4 Willoughby =
Road|
--|Internet : skj@acm.org                               |Bracknell       =
   |
--|Telephone: +44 (0)1344 476320 Fax: +44 (0)1344 476302|Berkshire       =
   |
--|Internal : 7261 6320   OP Mail: S.K.Johnston@BRA0801 |RG12 8TJ        =
   |
--|WWW URL  : http://www.acm.org/~skj/                  |United Kingdom  =
   |
--`----------------------------------------------------------------------=
---'
end Sig;

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Joe Gwinn]

In article <01bba6ce$f10dae20$488371a5@dhoossr.iquest.com>, "David C.
Hoos, Sr." <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com> wrote:

> -- 
> Greg A Barnett <barnett@bright.net> wrote in article
[snip]
> >
> As for the DoD's "abandonment" of Ada, you could refer them to the DoD 5000
> SERIES POLICY DOCUMENTS, found at
> "http://www.acq.osd.mil/api/asm/dod5000.html".
> Here is a snippet from that page:
[big snip]

Umm.  Greg's question was about the future, not the past.

Joe Gwinn

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Jon S Anthony]

In article <4vd8z1ze0o.fsf@world.std.com> srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) writes:

> Lines: 0

:-)  Pretty clever reply (assuming this was intentional).

/Jon

-- 
Jon Anthony
Organon Motives, Inc.
1 Williston Road, Suite 4
Belmont, MA 02178

617.484.3383
jsa@organon.com

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Frank Manning]

In article <52qso0$1b3l@ilx018.iil.intel.com> Uri Raz
<uraz@iil.intel.com> writes:

>In article <529vd7$h9l@lex.zippo.com> nasser@apldbio.com writes:
>
>> If you see 1000 ads asking for skill A, and 1 asking for skill B,
>> are you saying I can't draw any conclusion from this? 

   [...]

>  You can conclude as following :
>   1. The demand for skill A within companies is greater then offered by
>      people within those companies.
>   2. The demand for skill B within companies is satisfied by people
>      within those companies.
>   3. The chances of one to find a job are greatly enhanced if he acquires
>      skill A, but are not if he acquires skill B.

Well, it's possible that all three statements are true. It's also
possible to find other explanations for the disparity in numbers. For
example, companies that use skill A may have a higher turnover. Or
companies may consider skill B to be a competitive advantage and prefer
not to advertise it, finding new hires using word-of-mouth instead.

Which brings up another difficulty -- for any given 12 month period, a
majority of employers (75-85%) hire *nobody* from classified ads, which
means you're trying to extrapolate from the 15-25% who do. That's
assuming the Olympus Research study I referred to earlier is accurate.

There are other problems. Phony ads, for example [*]:

  "Some employers run fake ads to test the loyalty of their
   employees (the ad lists only a box number to write to).

   Some employment agencies run fake ads, usually listing
   jobs that have already been filled, in order to draw you
   in (the old 'bait and switch' process).

   Some swindlers run fake ads, pretending they are employers,
   so that they can get your money (the clue is: the ad give
   you a 900 number to call) or get your Social Security number
   and the number of your driver's license..."

So how many of those 1001 ads are fake? Who knows?

-- Frank Manning
-- Chair, AIAA-Tucson Section

[*] Bolles, Richard. _The 1995 What Color Is Your Parachute_, p. 37.

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Robert Dewar]

I got the following post from GA

G Aharonian: >>>>>>long term viability of Ada            Wed, 2 Oct 1996 13:33
-- 16:03 --comp.lang.ada-- 40 MORE+next --help:?--All--

Does this mean that GA has run out of things to say on the subject??? :-)

Re: long term viability of Ada

[Ken Garlington]

Joe Gwinn wrote:
> 
> In article <01bba6ce$f10dae20$488371a5@dhoossr.iquest.com>, "David C.
> Hoos, Sr." <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com> wrote:
> 
> > --
> > Greg A Barnett <barnett@bright.net> wrote in article
> [snip]
> > >
> > As for the DoD's "abandonment" of Ada, you could refer them to the DoD 5000
> > SERIES POLICY DOCUMENTS, found at
> > "http://www.acq.osd.mil/api/asm/dod5000.html".
> > Here is a snippet from that page:
> [big snip]
> 
> Umm.  Greg's question was about the future, not the past.

This is the _new_ DoD policy document, which (according to the people 
that wrote it) represents DoD's position for the immediate future.

> 
> Joe Gwinn

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"
For more info, see http://www.lmtas.com or http://www.lmco.com