From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,e6d1607a5397de6b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-10-30 10:03:57 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.bu.edu!inmet!not-for-mail From: Tucker Taft Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Ada World Embarrassed by the Defense Industry? Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 13:03:54 -0500 Organization: AverStar (formerly Intermetrics) Burlington, MA USA Message-ID: <39FDB80A.728339A9@averstar.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: nebula.burl.averstar.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: inmet2.burl.averstar.com 972929035 14897 141.199.8.77 (30 Oct 2000 18:03:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@inmet2.burl.averstar.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Oct 2000 18:03:55 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:1636 Date: 2000-10-30T18:03:55+00:00 List-Id: Ken Garlington wrote: > > While looking at the SIGAda 2000 web site, I notice that the role of Ada in > defense applications is minimized (even after the explicit requirements in > this area were dropped). For example, the list of "recent" successful > Ada-based systems includes only commercial projects, some five years old, > although one of the most recent Ada success stories occurred just a few days > ago (October 24). I also notice that an interview last year with Tucker Taft > included the statement "These days we?re focused mostly on commercial > success stories..." I can understand wanting to promote commercial > applications, but isn't this going a little overboard? In my experience (which is admittedly limited), DoD folks are not interested in military success stories; they want to see technology that is commercially successful. Unfortunately, it seems that commercial folks are also not particularly interested in a language that is associated with defense. Hence, there seems no particular upside in spending energy researching defense success stories, as nobody seems to be willing to use them as a reason to consider Ada. If the story really emphasized how Ada was *not* mandated, and was chosen because of its inherent advantages, and it delivered successfully, then the fact that it was a military project would hopefully not get in the way of someone using it as a reason to consider Ada. In general, the commercial marketplace has a bit of a love/hate relationship with the military marketplace. And the military marketplace seems to have a love/hate relationship with itself ;-). > > http://www.acm.org/sigs/sigada/conf/sigada2000/ > http://206.144.247.86/vol18_no18/interview/118-1.html > http://www.lmaeronautics.com/news/press/jsf/jsf_1stflight.html -- -Tucker Taft stt@averstar.com http://www.averstar.com/~stt/ Technical Director, Commercial Division, AverStar (formerly Intermetrics) (http://www.averstar.com/services/IT_consulting.html) Burlington, MA USA