From: jamwahl@badlands.nodak.edu (Jim)
Subject: Re: Future of Ada?
Date: 1999/01/14
Date: 1999-01-13T22:15:02+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <369d3623.3304973@news.nodak.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: m3g19fjaqv.fsf@mheaney.ni.net
Matthew,
Thank you very much for an intelligent and informative response.
-Jim
On Wed, 13 Jan 1999 18:18:19 GMT, Matthew Heaney
<matthew_heaney@acm.org> wrote:
>jamwahl@badlands.nodak.edu (Jim) writes:
>
>> I am just wondering what those who frequent this news group think
>> about the future of Ada. I've heard a lot of talk that Ada is kind of
>> dying out and that not even the military is using it any more. Any
>> comments would be greatly appreciated.
>
>You may be thinking of the US DoD's change in policy wrt contracting
>software intensive systems. Way back when, the government had a
>putative rule that all software for weapons systems had to be written in
>Ada. This policy is sometimes refered to as the "Ada mandate."
>
>However, the government is moving to
<the rest snipped>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-01-14 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-01-13 0:00 Future of Ada? Jim
1999-01-13 0:00 ` Markus Kuhn
[not found] ` <m3iuebji2a.fsf@fred.muc.de>
1999-01-14 0:00 ` Status of GNAT 3.11p Markus Kuhn
1999-01-15 0:00 ` dewar
1999-01-15 0:00 ` dewar
1999-01-16 0:00 ` Future of Ada? Kevin
1999-01-13 0:00 ` David Gillon
1999-01-13 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1999-01-14 0:00 ` Jim [this message]
1999-01-13 0:00 ` E. Robert Tisdale
1999-01-14 0:00 ` Jeff Schweiger
1999-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-01-14 0:00 ` Jim
1999-01-13 0:00 ` dennison
1999-01-18 0:00 ` news.oxy.com
1999-01-19 0:00 ` Rush Kester
1999-01-19 0:00 ` Kirk
1999-01-19 0:00 ` Paul Whittington
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox