comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman)
Subject: Re: An observation of Ada (may offend)
Date: 20 Mar 1995 12:19:52 -0500
Date: 1995-03-20T12:19:52-05:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3kkdfo$763@felix.seas.gwu.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3kiani$i49@gnat.cs.nyu.edu

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



  reply	other threads:[~1995-03-20 17:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
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 [this message]
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
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1995-03-17  9:27 R.A.L Williams
1995-03-17 15:23 ` Robb Nebbe
1995-03-17 17:08 ` Norman H. Cohen
1995-03-20  3:23   ` S. Tucker Taft
1995-03-20 10:13   ` Robb Nebbe
1995-03-21 21:05     ` Robert Dewar
1995-03-20 16:15   ` Robert I. Eachus
1995-03-21 19:47     ` Norman H. Cohen
1995-03-22  1:28       ` David Weller
1995-03-23  5:47       ` Robert Dewar
1995-03-23 16:38         ` Robert I. Eachus
1995-03-24 10:46           ` Peter Hermann
1995-03-24 16:52             ` David Weller
1995-03-26  4:03               ` Robert Dewar
1995-03-24 21:33             ` Tucker Taft
1995-03-27 18:58             ` Mark A Biggar
1995-03-24 19:45           ` Garlington KE
1995-03-27 19:58             ` Robert I. Eachus
1995-03-28 16:29               ` Garlington KE
1995-03-28 19:30                 ` Robert I. Eachus
1995-03-28 22:37                   ` Garlington KE
1995-03-29  8:31                   ` Robb Nebbe
1995-03-25 17:58           ` Robert Dewar
1995-03-26  6:20             ` R_Tim_Coslet
1995-03-27 20:38               ` Robert I. Eachus
1995-03-26  3:50           ` celier
     [not found]           ` <3l1lkq$pm6@gnat.csn <3l2o9a$3a1@infomatch.com>
1995-03-27 23:16             ` Robert Dewar
1995-03-23 18:05       ` John DiCamillo
1995-03-17 23:01 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
1995-03-18 12:41 ` Tucker Taft
1995-03-22 16:50 ` Renaud HEBERT
1995-03-23 23:23   ` John Volan
1995-03-24  0:38   ` Robert Dewar
1995-03-27 10:28 R.A.L Williams
1995-03-27  0:00 ` Norman H. Cohen
1995-04-04  0:00   ` Robert Dewar
1995-03-28 17:07 ` Larry Kilgallen, LJK Software
1995-03-27 10:38 R.A.L Williams
1995-03-30  3:14 ` Michael D. Griffin
1995-03-30  0:00   ` David Weller
1995-04-04  0:00   ` Jack Beidler
1995-04-04  0:00   ` Brian Rogoff
1995-03-29  0:00 R.A.L Williams
1995-03-30  0:00 R.A.L Williams
1995-04-03  0:00 ` Norman H. Cohen
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox