* An observation of Ada (may offend) @ 1995-03-12 23:39 Matt Bruce 1995-03-13 0:34 ` David Weller 1995-03-14 4:49 ` Vladimir Vukicevic 0 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Matt Bruce @ 1995-03-12 23:39 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi, Is it my imagination, or is Ada the demonic lovechild of C and Pascal? I've had to study Ada this semester for a unit at my Uni called Advanced Programming Techniques. What fun. Not. :) Learning techniques AND a new language - what an experience - considering I'm learning COBOL and SQL this semester. Enough of my griping. Back to the assignments... ----------------------------------------------------------- Matt Bruce st952adf@pilot.stu.cowan.edu.au (preferred) "Even with an IQ of 6,000, it's still brown trousers time." -------- For information about this Usenet posting service, send mail to remailer@soda.berkeley.edu, with Subject: remailer-info. Please, don't throw knives. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-12 23:39 An observation of Ada (may offend) Matt Bruce @ 1995-03-13 0:34 ` David Weller 1995-03-14 4:49 ` Vladimir Vukicevic 1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: David Weller @ 1995-03-13 0:34 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3k00no$8qv@agate.berkeley.edu>, Matt Bruce <st952adf@pilot.stu.cowan.edu.au> wrote: > >Is it my imagination, or is Ada the demonic lovechild of C and Pascal? > That's the first time I've headr _that_ suggestion! :-) Well, I'd rather liken it to an _angelic_ lovechild of C++ and Pascal, with it's own (real-time) personality thrown in. :-) >Programming Techniques. What fun. Not. :) Learning techniques AND a new >language - what an experience - considering I'm learning COBOL and SQL ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >this semester. > I think I've located the source of your frustration :-) -- Frustrated with C, C++, Pascal, Fortran? Ada95 _might_ be for you! For all sorts of interesting Ada95 tidbits, run the command: "finger dweller@starbase.neosoft.com | more" (or e-mail with "finger" as subj.) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-12 23:39 An observation of Ada (may offend) Matt Bruce 1995-03-13 0:34 ` David Weller @ 1995-03-14 4:49 ` Vladimir Vukicevic 1995-03-15 15:39 ` Ada myths (was: An observation of Ada (may offend)) Theodore Dennison 1995-03-17 17:00 ` An observation of Ada (may offend) Michael Feldman 1 sibling, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Vladimir Vukicevic @ 1995-03-14 4:49 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3k00no$8qv@agate.berkeley.edu> Matt Bruce <st952adf@pilot.stu.cowan.edu.au> writes: > Is it my imagination, or is Ada the demonic lovechild of C and Pascal? Most likely your imagination. You need more sleep. > I've had to study Ada this semester for a unit at my Uni called Advanced > Programming Techniques. What fun. Not. :) Learning techniques AND a new > language - what an experience - considering I'm learning COBOL and SQL > this semester. > > Enough of my griping. Back to the assignments... Interesting. When I saw the subject, I was prepared for an in-depth summary of why someone thinks Ada is not a 'good' (however you define 'good') language. Unfortunately, it is nothing of the sort. I'm waiting for one of those. :-) Also, having to learn COBOL and SQL in the same semester with Ada might give Ada a sour taste, especially if your prof can't make it appealing. (Not saying that you have a bad prof, just generalizing. :-) Speaking of why people think Ada is not a good language... it'd be nice if someone collected the many myths about Ada, and collected them all together for distribution to the unbelievers. :-) This would simplify telling people about Ada, especially if all they've heard was that it's a "big ugly ancient language used by the government", or that it's too 'huge' to be worth doing anything with. -- Vladimir Vukicevicn -- vladimir@intrepid.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Ada myths (was: An observation of Ada (may offend)) 1995-03-14 4:49 ` Vladimir Vukicevic @ 1995-03-15 15:39 ` Theodore Dennison 1995-03-17 17:00 ` An observation of Ada (may offend) Michael Feldman 1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Theodore Dennison @ 1995-03-15 15:39 UTC (permalink / raw) Vladimir Vukicevic <vladimir@speedy.intrepid.com> writes: > > > > Enough of my griping. Back to the assignments... > > Speaking of why people think Ada is not a good language... it'd be nice > if someone collected the many myths about Ada, and collected them all > together for distribution to the unbelievers. :-) This would simplify > telling people about Ada, especially if all they've heard was that it's > a "big ugly ancient language used by the government", or that it's too > 'huge' to be worth doing anything with. > My personal favorite is: "Ada leaks memory". Yup. I just sat the box right here on my desk, and look! Memory is dripping off my desk and collecting in a big pool on the floor here. I'd better go get a mop before it soaks into the carpet... T.E.D. (sarcastic comment repeated witout permission) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-14 4:49 ` Vladimir Vukicevic 1995-03-15 15:39 ` Ada myths (was: An observation of Ada (may offend)) Theodore Dennison @ 1995-03-17 17:00 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-17 13:09 ` Fred J. McCall 1995-03-22 17:20 ` Richard G. Hash 1 sibling, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Michael Feldman @ 1995-03-17 17:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <VLADIMIR.95Mar13204932@speedy.intrepid.com>, Vladimir Vukicevic <vladimir@speedy.intrepid.com> wrote: >Speaking of why people think Ada is not a good language... it'd be nice >if someone collected the many myths about Ada, and collected them all >together for distribution to the unbelievers. :-) This would simplify >telling people about Ada, especially if all they've heard was that it's >a "big ugly ancient language used by the government", or that it's too >'huge' to be worth doing anything with. Here's a contribution: MYTH: "Ada is used only by the U.S. Department of Defense" RESPONSE: Here's a list I'm just getting started with, of application domains and lists of projects in which Ada is present in at least substantial amounts of code, if not exclusively. That a project is not _all_ Ada is a commentary on our increasingly mature view of reuse and mixed-language programming. Feel free to add to or correct my enumeration. I want the data to be up to date and verified. At some point I will put this in better format, including html. Air Traffic Control Systems, by country Australia Belgium Brazil Canada China Czech Republic Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Hong Kong Hungary India Ireland Kenya Netherlands New Zealand Pakistan Scotland South Africa Spain Sweden United Kingdom United States Vietnam Banking and Financial Networks Reuters Swiss Postbank Electronic Funds Transfer system Commercial Aircraft Airbus 330 Airbus 340 Beechjet 400A (US business jet) Beech Starship I (US business jet) Beriev BE-200 (Russian forest fire patrol) Boeing 737-200, -400, -500, -600, -700, -800 Boeing 747-400 Boeing 757 Boeing 767 Boeing 777 Canadair Regional Jet Embraer CBA-123 and CBA-145 (Brazilian-made regional airliners) Fokker F-100 (Dutch DC-9-size airliner) Ilyushin 96M (Russian jetliner) McDonnell Douglas MD-11 (new model DC10) Saab 2000 Tupolev TU-204 (Russian jetliner) Communication and Navigational Satellites Cassini EOS - NASA's Earth Observing System Goes INMARSAT - voice and data communications to ships and mobile communications Intelsat VII NSTAR (Nippon Telephone and Telegraph) PanAmSat (South American Intelsat-like consortium) RadarSat (Canada) United States Coast Guard Differential Global Positioning System Railway Transportation Cairo Metro Calcutta Metro Caracas Metro Channel Tunnel Conrail (major U.S. railway company) French High-Speed Rail (TGV) French National Railways Hong Kong Suburban Rail London Underground Paris Metro Paris Suburban Rail Television Industry Canal+ (French pay-per-view TV, remote cable box control software) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-17 17:00 ` An observation of Ada (may offend) Michael Feldman @ 1995-03-17 13:09 ` Fred J. McCall 1995-03-18 20:34 ` Michael Feldman ` (4 more replies) 1995-03-22 17:20 ` Richard G. Hash 1 sibling, 5 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Fred J. McCall @ 1995-03-17 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3kcf82$ln3@felix.seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes: >In article <VLADIMIR.95Mar13204932@speedy.intrepid.com>, >Vladimir Vukicevic <vladimir@speedy.intrepid.com> wrote: >>Speaking of why people think Ada is not a good language... it'd be nice >>if someone collected the many myths about Ada, and collected them all >>together for distribution to the unbelievers. :-) This would simplify >>telling people about Ada, especially if all they've heard was that it's >>a "big ugly ancient language used by the government", or that it's too >>'huge' to be worth doing anything with. >Here's a contribution: >MYTH: "Ada is used only by the U.S. Department of Defense" >RESPONSE: Here's a list I'm just getting started with, of application > domains and lists of projects in which Ada is present in at least > substantial amounts of code, if not exclusively. I'm curious; how many of the things on the list are not government related or regulated? Is it significantly easier, for example, to get the government to sign off on aircraft software in part because it happens to be written in Ada (irrespective of the actual implementation or of the merits of the language)? That and the few banking applications would seem to me to be the only ones on your list not run by governments. Non-myth -- virtually all Ada software is produced for governmetn agencies? > That a project is > not _all_ Ada is a commentary on our increasingly mature view of > reuse and mixed-language programming. Now if only we could convince the United States Congress of that. >Air Traffic Control Systems, by country Pretty much government, no? >Communication and Navigational Satellites Again, pretty much government, no? >Railway Transportation Again? >Television Industry >Canal+ (French pay-per-view TV, remote cable box control software) I have no idea of the status of the French television industry. Government run or no? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-17 13:09 ` Fred J. McCall @ 1995-03-18 20:34 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-19 22:20 ` Robert Dewar 1995-03-21 3:02 ` Michael M. Bishop 1995-03-20 9:31 ` Robb Nebbe ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Michael Feldman @ 1995-03-18 20:34 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <fjm.63.000D29AE@ti.com>, Fred J. McCall <fjm@ti.com> wrote: >In article <3kcf82$ln3@felix.seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes: >I'm curious; how many of the things on the list are not government related or >regulated? Is it significantly easier, for example, to get the government to >sign off on aircraft software in part because it happens to be written in Ada >(irrespective of the actual implementation or of the merits of the language)? >That and the few banking applications would seem to me to be the only ones on >your list not run by governments. It is true for many, if not most, of these domains that the government of one country or another is involved. Railways and transit systems, for example, are - outside the US - government-owned or -related. From all I can tell from the various articles and tips I've read ofer the years, in no case was Ada _mandated_. Thomson CSF, for example, which builds a large number of the ATC systems, is on the record as saying that the governments did not mandate Ada, and also that Thomson, and their competitors (Hughes, Loral, Siemens) pretty much agree that Ada is the only way to go. I have never seen any indication in writing that Ada, _per se_ has won a contract for any of the projects in this list, and I don't think I've ever heard anything to that effect "off the record" either. > >Non-myth -- virtually all Ada software is produced for governmetn agencies? Oversimplification. It is true for many of the projects listed here, except for the airliners and the French cable TV project, which is a private (I think), pay-per-view cable network. Also, Nippon Telephone and Telegraph, which appears under "satellites" is (said to be) one of the largest Ada users in the world, and I don't think they are a Japanese government company. I have heard a number of rumors of large Ada projects in the baking industry of a number of companies; I don't put anything down in these lists unless I can verify the information reasonably well. Government-sponsored projects are, world-wide apparently, more "open" than commercial ones. > >> That a project is >> not _all_ Ada is a commentary on our increasingly mature view of >> reuse and mixed-language programming. > >Now if only we could convince the United States Congress of that. You and I both know that the so-called "mandate" has some very large loopholes in it. Let's save that discussion for another discussion.:-) > >>Air Traffic Control Systems, by country > >Pretty much government, no? Yep. > >>Communication and Navigational Satellites > >Again, pretty much government, no? Not sure. NT&T is not government, AFAIK. > >>Railway Transportation > >Again? If the Texas financiers had succeeded in putting the TGV project together for the Dallas/Austin/San Antonio/Houston network, it would have been in private hands, using TGV technology, which (probably) means Ada software. > >>Television Industry > >>Canal+ (French pay-per-view TV, remote cable box control software) > >I have no idea of the status of the French television industry. Government >run or no? As is often the case in Europe, the government is both into and not into nearly everything. I think Canal+ is private though, like HBO. Bottom line: if your point is that only governments care about Ada, I think (but have no way to prove) that you are really reaching. All those European projects are built by (mostly) private-sector companies; as far as I know, the coding language never entered into the contract process. I would dearly love to have verifiable information on more of the banking-industry stuff. There are also rumors of auto industry projects. These industries are very competitive and therefore secretive. They are also quite paranoid about security.:-) The defense industry has tended to be more open than the private sector. n discussing stuff like this. Mike Feldman ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-18 20:34 ` Michael Feldman @ 1995-03-19 22:20 ` Robert Dewar 1995-03-20 17:19 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-20 20:38 ` Kevin F. Quinn 1995-03-21 3:02 ` Michael M. Bishop 1 sibling, 2 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1995-03-19 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw) Isn't the channel tunnel signalling system in Ada? That certainly is not a government project (the government holds an equity stake, but so do lots of other people, in the private company that is digging and running the thing!) Actually it is not so surprising that many (but certainly not all) of the Ada projects are govt related. First, high integrity large systems are likely to be govt related (not too many companies are in the space business for instance!!) Second, you are of course more likely to know about the govt related projects. There are certainly many examples of non-govt related Ada projects (Boeing commercial is an obvious example). Earlier this week, I was at a meeting at Praxis, who makes a tool, SPARC Examiner, used in the creation of high integrity Ada code. They reported that more than half their customers are commercial customers. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-19 22:20 ` Robert Dewar @ 1995-03-20 17:19 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-21 21:02 ` Robert Dewar ` (2 more replies) 1995-03-20 20:38 ` Kevin F. Quinn 1 sibling, 3 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Michael Feldman @ 1995-03-20 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3kiani$i49@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>, Robert Dewar <dewar@cs.nyu.edu> wrote: >Isn't the channel tunnel signalling system in Ada? That certainly is not >a government project (the government holds an equity stake, but so do lots >of other people, in the private company that is digging and running the >thing!) Well put, Robert. Sometimes it's hard for U.S. folks to understand that the relationships between government and industry are much different in Europe than here. The Chunnel project is a good example of the interweaving of governments, private concerns, and sometimes multilateral government groups, such as the Safety Commission for the Chunnel, whose mission is _just_ to oversee safety concerns. If I recall correctly, that commission is a creature of the British and French governments. It's hard for Americans to follow that many companies in Europe have mixed government/private stockholders. In some cases, the government is the dominant (or only) stockholder, in others there is lots of private participation as well. In my experience, Europeans seem more resigned to the idea that government is involved in their businesses and their lives; I observe that they tend to deride government, _per se_, much less than we do. I've often thought that part of the resistance in the U.S. to Ada, because of its DoD connections, has less to do with political correctness ("I won't touch anything the bomb-builders use") than with traditional American disdain for government, and especially the Feds ("If the government did it, it couldn't possibly be any good."). How do European readers of CLA react to this? [snip] >There are certainly many examples of non-govt related Ada projects (Boeing >commercial is an obvious example). Earlier this week, I was at a meeting >at Praxis, who makes a tool, SPARC Examiner, used in the creation of >high integrity Ada code. They reported that more than half their customers >are commercial customers. Naturally it would be nice to know who these customers are.:-) People (perhaps Fred is one) who will seek out _any_ reason to argue that Ada is unsuccessful, will usually find lots of reasons, if they engage in the kind of speculation Fred did ("only governments use Ada"). I persist in my foggy-headed notion that market share is not the only measure of success. Ada is succeeding in the areas in which it was designed to succeed. Sure, I'd love it if all the PC developers were using Ada, but that is an unrealistic expectation (at last for now), and is, in an important way, irrelevant. Mike Feldman ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-20 17:19 ` Michael Feldman @ 1995-03-21 21:02 ` Robert Dewar 1995-03-21 23:01 ` Kevin F. Quinn 1995-03-22 12:43 ` Mike Meier 2 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 1995-03-21 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw) It would be nice to know who those customers are says Mike, speaking of Praxis SPARK-Examiner, commercial users. Actually we discussed at the meeting last week, that this would make an interesting Ada use/success story, and they thought that several of their customers would be happy to share in such a project. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-20 17:19 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-21 21:02 ` Robert Dewar @ 1995-03-21 23:01 ` Kevin F. Quinn 1995-03-22 12:43 ` Mike Meier 2 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Kevin F. Quinn @ 1995-03-21 23:01 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3kkdfo$763@felix.seas.gwu.edu>, mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) wrote: > [...] > In my experience, Europeans seem more resigned to the idea that > government is involved in their businesses and their lives; I > observe that they tend to deride government, _per se_, much less > than we do. > > I've often thought that part of the resistance in the U.S. to Ada, > because of its DoD connections, has less to do with political > correctness ("I won't touch anything the bomb-builders use") than > with traditional American disdain for government, and especially the > Feds ("If the government did it, it couldn't possibly be any good."). > > How do European readers of CLA react to this? Fairly well, I guess. Certainly in the current climate in the UK, as far as possible everything is farmed out to the private sector. We have a situation where if something needs doing, the gov. will do their level best to make sure they do (and spend!) as little as possible. I don't know about the US, but in Europe, and especially in the UK, Ada is booming. There is far more Ada work about than there are people to do it. If I walked out of my current job I would be able to walk straight into another one by the end of the week, no problem. Much as I might like to think that's 'coz I'm very good, it's actually 'coz there's tons and tons of work out there. > I persist in my foggy-headed notion that market share is not the only > measure of success. Ada is succeeding in the areas in which it was > designed to succeed. Well, some of them :) I haven't seen much code re-use for example... Although I think that is due to the relative agd of Ada - since it tends to be used in "big" projects; i.e. ones that run for several years, there hasn't been a lot of chance to build up suitable libraries. And in 'big' projects the re-use tends to be much higher up, at the requirements level. In my experience, anyway. However packaging is used with a vengeance. Us grunts know a good thing when we see it :) > Sure, I'd love it if all the PC developers were > using Ada, but that is an unrealistic expectation (at last for now), > and is, in an important way, irrelevant. Of course, most PC software is still developed in the old hack-and-slash method. You won't see them using Ada. They'll use C++, but only because they can write C with it :-> One of Ada's main strengths as I see it is the inherent legibility of code written in Ada. More than half of the projects I've worked on in the last few years have been able to avoid generating any "design" documentation as such; the Ada practically IS the design. Luckily it's a compilable design :-) The cost savings are very significant, obviously. Anyway, I drift somewhat from the thread... -- Kevin F. Quinn * "That's not what you said when you sent him your kevq@banana.demon.co.uk * Navel." "Novel, Baldrick, not navel." kevq@cix.compulink.co.uk * "Well it sounds like a case of soggy grapefruits Compu$erve: 100025,1525 * to me..." BlackAdder III ... This is your head..THiS iS yoUR HeAD On WindOwS. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-20 17:19 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-21 21:02 ` Robert Dewar 1995-03-21 23:01 ` Kevin F. Quinn @ 1995-03-22 12:43 ` Mike Meier 2 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Mike Meier @ 1995-03-22 12:43 UTC (permalink / raw) Michael Feldman (mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu) wrote: : In article <3kiani$i49@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>, Robert Dewar <dewar@cs.nyu.edu> wrote: : >There are certainly many examples of non-govt related Ada projects (Boeing : >commercial is an obvious example). Earlier this week, I was at a meeting : >at Praxis, who makes a tool, SPARC Examiner, used in the creation of : >high integrity Ada code. They reported that more than half their customers : >are commercial customers. : Naturally it would be nice to know who these customers are.:-) I can certainly sympathize with those companies who keep their use of Ada a secret. My company, even though most of its work is government contracts, takes the same approach with some proprietary projects. But, I wonder if we could get companies to provide this information on an anonymous basis. We'd have to ask them to mail to one "trusted" place (which could even strip identifiers automatically) with a count of the number of projects of each type and/or size (or something like that). Could we make something like this work? Mike Meier Magnavox Electronic Systems Company ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-19 22:20 ` Robert Dewar 1995-03-20 17:19 ` Michael Feldman @ 1995-03-20 20:38 ` Kevin F. Quinn 1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Kevin F. Quinn @ 1995-03-20 20:38 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3kiani$i49@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>, dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote: > Isn't the channel tunnel signalling system in Ada? I believe so. Another one: Rolls-Royce now use Ada for much of the control software on their aircraft engines. There's a lot of Ada in air traffic control systems, as well (certainly in Europe, anyway). I guess you probably knew that, anyway. > [...] Second, you are of course more likely to know > about the govt related projects. Hit the nail on the head there, I think. > Earlier this week, I was at a meeting > at Praxis, who makes a tool, SPARC Examiner, used in the creation of > high integrity Ada code. For information, Praxis have just bought PVL (Program Validation Limited) who developed the spark (not sparc) examiner et. al. PVL were a very small company, attached in some ways to a University (I forget which one). -- Kevin F. Quinn * "That's not what you said when you sent him your kevq@banana.demon.co.uk * Navel." "Novel, Baldrick, not navel." kevq@cix.compulink.co.uk * "Well it sounds like a case of soggy grapefruits Compu$erve: 100025,1525 * to me..." BlackAdder III ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-18 20:34 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-19 22:20 ` Robert Dewar @ 1995-03-21 3:02 ` Michael M. Bishop 1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Michael M. Bishop @ 1995-03-21 3:02 UTC (permalink / raw) Speaking of non-governmental Ada projects, what is the status of the Ada flight software on the Boeing 777? Haven't they already test flown the 777? If so, have there been any remarks concerning the run-time performance of the Ada software? -- | Mike Bishop | The opinions expressed here reflect | | bishopm@source.asset.com | those of this station, its management, | | Member: Team Ada | and the entire world. | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-17 13:09 ` Fred J. McCall 1995-03-18 20:34 ` Michael Feldman @ 1995-03-20 9:31 ` Robb Nebbe 1995-03-20 20:16 ` Mats Weber ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Robb Nebbe @ 1995-03-20 9:31 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <fjm.63.000D29AE@ti.com>, fjm@ti.com (Fred J. McCall) writes: |> |> I'm curious; how many of the things on the list are not government related or |> regulated? Is it significantly easier, for example, to get the government to |> sign off on aircraft software in part because it happens to be written in Ada |> (irrespective of the actual implementation or of the merits of the language)? |> That and the few banking applications would seem to me to be the only ones on |> your list not run by governments. |> |> Non-myth -- virtually all Ada software is produced for government agencies? I would guess that a lot of the projects listed are very large and involve large groups of developers. Many have real-time constraints, are distributed and involve concurrency. They are not all saftey-critical but many require a very high level of reliability. Now, where is the correlation? Governments seem to be naturally involved in almost all large safety-critical projects. Furthermore it isn't clear how much government involvement affects the choice of a language. In the US the government seems to be keen on saying "use Ada" but I don't think that is always the case outside of the US. Here in Switzerland they are replacing the signaling software in many of the train stations (this is more of a station by station approach based on necessity rather than anything big like replacing all the signaling software in all the stations). My understanding is that Swiss Federal Railway doesn't give a hoot in which language the software is written. The software is in Ada but the choice of a language had nothing to do with government involvement. Interestingly enough the parent company of the company doing the project had applied some presure to use C rather than Ada but this was rejected as being technically unfounded. Robb Nebbe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-17 13:09 ` Fred J. McCall 1995-03-18 20:34 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-20 9:31 ` Robb Nebbe @ 1995-03-20 20:16 ` Mats Weber 1995-03-22 19:44 ` Stephen McNeill 1995-03-28 14:48 ` Wes Groleau 4 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Mats Weber @ 1995-03-20 20:16 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <fjm.63.000D29AE@ti.com>, fjm@ti.com (Fred J. McCall) wrote: > >Canal+ (French pay-per-view TV, remote cable box control software) > > I have no idea of the status of the French television industry. Government > run or no? Canal+ is private. It is a channel you have to pay for (it is encrypted and you must rent a decoder). They participate in the production of almost every french movie, and many american movies too. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-17 13:09 ` Fred J. McCall ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 1995-03-20 20:16 ` Mats Weber @ 1995-03-22 19:44 ` Stephen McNeill 1995-03-28 14:48 ` Wes Groleau 4 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Stephen McNeill @ 1995-03-22 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <fjm.63.000D29AE@ti.com> fjm@ti.com (Fred J. McCall) writes: >>Air Traffic Control Systems, by country > >Pretty much government, no? Speak for yourself... So far as most countries outside the USA are concerned (excuse the prejudice, it is not intended to offend) I suspect that it makes no odds whether the whole thing is written in Ada, C++, FORTRAN or Visual Basic (shudder) so long as the client who is responsible for the transportation of the hundreds of thousands of (non-government) citizens is confident that the contractor can do the job safely and efficiently. As far as the New Zealand ATC is concerned I understand that this was the same as that sold to a number of other agencies. So, was it successful because it was a government contractor enamoured of Ada (in New Zealand ! haw haw...), or was it successful because it was a good product ? I think we can chase out tails on this argument. >>Television Industry > >>Canal+ (French pay-per-view TV, remote cable box control software) > >I have no idea of the status of the French television industry. Government >run or no? I think you miss the point. Ada *is* conspicuous in its use in complex systems, quite contrary to the ad hoc model of the uptake of other languages. Is this good or bad ? Well, since the software industry is so young, history is being created as we speak (I mean, type...). Come back in 20 years time and we'll discuss it on comp.lang.ancient.ada. Stephen McNeill Landcare Research New Zealand Ltd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-17 13:09 ` Fred J. McCall ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 1995-03-22 19:44 ` Stephen McNeill @ 1995-03-28 14:48 ` Wes Groleau 4 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Wes Groleau @ 1995-03-28 14:48 UTC (permalink / raw) In a previous article, kevq@banana.demon.co.uk (Kevin F. Quinn) says: >I don't know about the US, but in Europe, and especially in the UK, >Ada is booming. There is far more Ada work about than there are >people to do it. Tell them to fax their job ads to me - my company is laying off about a hundred a month >Of course, most PC software is still developed in the old >hack-and-slash method. You won't see them using Ada. They'll use >C++, but only because they can write C with it :-> I recently read a book on Object-Oriented Programming, thinking I was going to learn some really hot techniques. Instead, page after page I kept thinking "I've always done it this way!" Too many programmers still think implementation rather than abstraction--just because Ada folks don't use the same jargon as the OOP folks doesn't mean they don't get the same benefits. C++ strikes me as an attempt to get some of the benefits of Ada-83 without giving up your dearly prized ability to ensure that your manager won't have a clue what your code means. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: An observation of Ada (may offend) 1995-03-17 17:00 ` An observation of Ada (may offend) Michael Feldman 1995-03-17 13:09 ` Fred J. McCall @ 1995-03-22 17:20 ` Richard G. Hash 1 sibling, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Richard G. Hash @ 1995-03-22 17:20 UTC (permalink / raw) Vladimir Vukicevic <vladimir@speedy.intrepid.com> wrote: > >Speaking of why people think Ada is not a good language... it'd be nice > >if someone collected the many myths about Ada - Nobody uses Ada unless they were MANDATED (tm) to use it. Oh wait, that's been repeated at least 100 times in this group, which means it's a verified net.fact. Sorry. -- Richard G. Hash phone: (713) 245-731 email: rgh@shell.com Geophysics Research, Shell Exploration and Production Company Member Team Ada Free Ada95 compilers: cs.nyu.edu:/pub/gnat Distributed, Full-OO, Multithreading, all built in. And it's free. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <9503171558.AA17100@atc.boeing.com>]
[parent not found: <LISTSERV@VM1.NoDak.EDU>]
* Re: Ada myths (was: An observation of Ada (may offend)) [not found] ` <LISTSERV@VM1.NoDak.EDU> @ 1995-03-17 16:07 ` Bob Crispen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread From: Bob Crispen @ 1995-03-17 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw) Thanks to Paul Pukite. For those of you keeping Ada pages on your site (or maybe some Team Ada folks want to put it somewhere public), here are Paul's words in HTML: <h1>Top 10 myths and misconceptions about Ada</h1> <strong><p>10. Myth: Ada is too complex and large a language.</strong> <ul><p>False. Some people look at the detailed language reference manual and equate a well-specified language (Ada) with that of a complex language. In fact, recent surveys show Ada to be the second most popular language, after Pascal, for first-year computer science courses. And with the current situation of cheap computing power, Ada is definitely NOT too large to implement. For example, a typical Ada Windows+DOS compiler requires just a few Megs of disk space. </ul> <strong><p>9. Myth: Ada costs too much.</strong> <ul><p>False. If you include features automatically supported with Ada, such as lint checking, range checking, etc. that normally require add-on tool support for other languages, the costs become comparable. Besides, GNAT Ada is free, comes on many different platforms, and is starting to be used in embedded systems. (...in any case, doesn't a programmer cost at least $50K a year?) </ul> <strong><p>8. Myth: Isn't Ada associated only with the military?</strong> <ul><p>No. It was originally sponsored by the DoD and in use by various military organizations. However, just like the Internet, VHDL, Berkeley UNIX and several other DoD-seeded projects, it has outgrown its roots; and Ada can now be considered an international commercial language. </ul> <strong><p>7. Myth: Can't use it for small applications.</strong> <ul><p>False. In fact, Ada _scales_ in use from the smallest desktop application to the onboard software of the largest aircraft (including the Airbus 340 and the Boeing 777). <pre> -- A complete Ada program to output "Hello World" with Text_IO; procedure Hello is begin Text_IO.Put_Line("Hello World"); end Hello; </pre> <p>Now, is that small enough for you? </ul> <strong><p>6. Myth: It doesn't allow me any programming freedom.</strong> <ul><p>False. You can actually have all the flexibility you want, but with Ada you will likely have to call attention to the implementation- specific sections of code. Remember that maintenance, portability, and team-programming are essentials elements of an Ada design. And if you want, you can _always_ interface Ada in a standard way to any other language (C, C++ classes, DLL (Ada DLL too!), Fortran). </ul> <strong><p>5. Myth: Ada is not a popular language.</strong> <ul><p>Not true. You would be surprised at who uses Ada. Important applications include air traffic control, communications satellites, commercial airliners, TGV, many cities' subway systems, and many other big projects that don't get a lot of publicity. </ul> <strong><p>4. Myth: Ada is for wimps (or words to that effect).</strong> <ul><p>I don't have a good explanation for this one. Is it the name Ada? Or maybe that Ada programming is not associated with software hackers, many of whom actually _enjoy_ spending time debugging obfuscated code? Actually, Ada programmers don't care what they get called, as long as they can continue to compile working programs the first time through without needing to invoke a debugger. </ul> <strong><p>3. Myth: Too verbose.</strong> <ul><p>As a means of documentation, Ada was designed to be easier to read than to write. In fact, entering code occupies only a fraction of a programmer's time while the enhanced readability will pay for itself when maintenance is needed. If you don't believe this, I hope no one has to read your code in a few years (including guess who?). </ul> <strong><p>2. Myth: Too slow, and executables too large.</strong> <ul><p>False. GNAT Ada uses the same backend as other GNU-supported languages. Compare for yourself, and you will discover Ada competes well with the other high performance languages. And if you really feel the need for speed, Ada tasking maps transparently to the new multi- processor-enabled computing platforms (such as SGI and NT). </ul> <p>And the #1 Ada myth: <strong><p>1. Myth: Ada is not object-oriented.</strong> <ul><p>False! Actually, Ada 95 is the first internationally standardized OO language (ISO, ANSI, FIPS) as it supports the essential features of object orientation -- including full inheritance and run-time polymorphism in addition to the abstraction and encapsulation always supported. And...Ada has had exceptions and generic templates for 10 years. </ul> (p.s. thanks to Prof.Feldman for providing extra ammo) Paul Pukite (pukite@DAINA.COM) Rev. Bob "O'Bob" Crispen revbob@hera.hv.boeing.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1995-03-28 14:48 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 20+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 1995-03-12 23:39 An observation of Ada (may offend) Matt Bruce 1995-03-13 0:34 ` David Weller 1995-03-14 4:49 ` Vladimir Vukicevic 1995-03-15 15:39 ` Ada myths (was: An observation of Ada (may offend)) Theodore Dennison 1995-03-17 17:00 ` An observation of Ada (may offend) Michael Feldman 1995-03-17 13:09 ` Fred J. McCall 1995-03-18 20:34 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-19 22:20 ` Robert Dewar 1995-03-20 17:19 ` Michael Feldman 1995-03-21 21:02 ` Robert Dewar 1995-03-21 23:01 ` Kevin F. Quinn 1995-03-22 12:43 ` Mike Meier 1995-03-20 20:38 ` Kevin F. Quinn 1995-03-21 3:02 ` Michael M. Bishop 1995-03-20 9:31 ` Robb Nebbe 1995-03-20 20:16 ` Mats Weber 1995-03-22 19:44 ` Stephen McNeill 1995-03-28 14:48 ` Wes Groleau 1995-03-22 17:20 ` Richard G. Hash [not found] <9503171558.AA17100@atc.boeing.com> [not found] ` <LISTSERV@VM1.NoDak.EDU> 1995-03-17 16:07 ` Ada myths (was: An observation of Ada (may offend)) Bob Crispen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox