Re: An observation of Ada (may offend)

[mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman)]

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