Re: (unverified) Ada mandate cancelled (Greg A would be proud)

[Dave Wood <dpw@aonix.com>]

Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> The idea of making Ada a preferred technology rather than mandating it
> might very well be advantageous even from an Ada advocate's point of view.
> Far too often now, Ada is mandated, but in practice someone is acting as
> though some other technology is preferred. A genuine policy of preferring
> Ada, other things being equal, might well be preferable. For example,
> this would mean that hardware supporting Ada should be preferred over
> hardware that does not support Ada.


I agree.  I have often thought that the best way to ensure contractors
will want to use Ada is not to (sorta, kinda) require it, but 
to give them financial incentive.  The most obvious way to do this,
it seems to me, is to fix the acquisition process such that a 
contractor bidding Ada will have (say) a 20% advantage on their
software bid over a contractor bidding another language.  I think
you'd have to duck to miss the stampede of contractors bidding Ada.

With a proper acquisition process, we wouldn't need no steenking
mandate.  (Sorry, couldn't resist...)

Once wayward contractors come back to Ada and find that the new 
generation of tools if fast, powerful, easy to use, and 
cost-effective, they'll start to forget some of their early 
experiences.

My humble opinion.

-- Dave Wood
-- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
-- Aonix - "Ada with an Attitude"
-- http://www.aonix.com