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,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!hubcap!billwolf
From: billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: The U.S. DoD in Software Fantasyland
Message-ID: <4411@hubcap.UUCP>
Date: 13 Feb 89 20:36:50 GMT
References: <4422@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Sender: news@hubcap.UUCP
Reply-To: wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>From article <4422@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>, by rich@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Richard Pettit):
> Cobol programmers garner no more respect from other software professionals
> than they do their employers, yet the lions share of the financial software
> that keeps the world running is written with this language by these people.
> And I don't think I need even discuss the "UNIX mentality" stereotype [...].
> There is something very large and very important missing in the profession
> of software engineering.  This is probably a system for giving software
> professionals credentials.  

   There's a similar discussion going on over in comp.software-eng re: the
   general lack of good Master's in Software Engineering programs, especially
   since the Wang Institute lost its funding from Wang Corporation & folded
   (It *had* offered a rather good MSE program, alas).

   On the positive side, Carnegie-Mellon is about to offer such a program.

> The problem with this is that the people appointed to develop such a
> credential system would be E.E.s and people with their M.A. in education.

   There's currently a rather shabby CDP (Certificate in Data Processing)
   system, which requires that you be able to answer unbelievably simple
   questions and that you know something about primitive COBOL concepts.

   Obviously, we have a long way to go.

> I don't have an answer.  It's just that his topic really causes me grief.
> It's just that I thought that after four years of grueling study in
> computer science that I'd be working in a REAL professional environment.

   It's damn hard to cause social change, which is what the impact of Ada
   on the software community amounts to.  We're trying to eliminate the
   "hacker" mentality, trying to upgrade the skills of a lot of poorly
   educated COBOL people (some would say "COBOL robots"), etc.  It's hard
   work, requiring activism on the local level from everyone who knows the
   score.

   I've found the distribution of articles such as "Ada Programming Language
   Improves Software Development" (from the December 1987 issue of the DPMA
   magazine _Data Management_) to be helpful in establishing basic 
   receptiveness among COBOL types, in conjunction with explanations of
   concepts such as recursion, concurrency, exception handling, etc.,
   which cause them to realize exactly how far behind they are.

   The primary problem to date is that many sites are vendor-dependent,
   and Ada bindings to products like CICS, DB2, etc. are only now being
   built as IBM rushes to play catch-up.  Until this happens, it's difficult
   to present detailed transition plans to the people in charge.

   With patience and dedication, we CAN win the war.  Major companies such
   as Shell and Reuters are forging ahead with Ada strategies.  In time,
   even the Dod will come around...  :-)  :-)  :-)


   Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu