Re: GNAT -vs- ObjectAda (was Re: where is the faq)

["Samuel T. Harris" <sam_harris@hso.link.com>]

Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> In article <_Fxp3.2745$U4.115180@clnws01.we.mediaone.net>,
>   pascmartin@mail.earthlink.net (Pascal F. Martin) wrote:
> > My company, which is providing centralized train control
> > system (no Ada: all C, C++ and Tcl), sometime must start user
> > training with a dumbed down course on "what is a mouse, how to
> > move it and what is this strange arrow on the TV set". These
> > persons then will control complete mass transit systems from
> > their multihead PCs.
> 
> No, there is never a situation in which you "must" follow this
> very unwise procedure which is designed to produce disasters.
> The idea that you can educate people to be effective programmers
> in this way is a manager's fantasy. You may get people to the
> point where they can write somewhat-working code, but that's
> about it.

I don't believe his company is trying to train mass transit
controllers. I believe his company is trying to train mass transit 
controllers on how to use a new PC centric system to do what they 
already know how to do. 

Having fielded a command and control system in the past, my users 
were replacing grease-boards and mission folders with PC terminals 
and screen projectors. Some of the users have _very_ little to no 
experience with PCs so we also had to start with the "basics" of
computer usage. Since we modelled the mission folders on the 
screen after the actual paper folders and the projected greaseboards
used the same format on the wall as the originals, transition
was not difficult. We were not there to train them on how
to run an aerial port, but how to use the new system to
do what they already knew how to do.

> 
> An analogous statement would be something like "our company
> is in the business of putting on piano recitals in major
> concert halls. But most typical folks don't know know anything
> about music. Sometimes we must start training concert pianists
> with dumbed down courses that start out at the level of "what
> is the difference between a white key and a black key on the
> piano". Yes, you might be able to train people who could play
> the notes more or less correctly, but you will not get competent
> musicians this way.

This statement is not analogous at all. Training in playing
the piano is not what is being attempted. Perhaps training
an already accomplished pianist in using a different kind
of keyboard would be a somewhat closer analogy.

> 
> Proper training is an essential for quality code. Training
> involves MUCH more than just learning to code in some computer
> language. In particular, programmers need an introduction to the
> notions of formal reasoning, especially if they are going to be
> working in safety critical real time areas.

You'll get no argument from me here!
I just don't believe it applies in Pascal's situation.

> 
> Robert Dewar
> Ada Core Technologies
> 
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

-- 
Samuel T. Harris, Principal Engineer
Raytheon, Scientific and Technical Systems
"If you can make it, We can fake it!"