Re: Ada Professionalism Document

[beth@gymble.UUCP (Beth Katz)]

I'm not sure I want to jump into this fray, but I'm very much pro-Ada
and anti-"Ada Professionalism Document".  First of all, as others
have mentioned, people using the Ada language should not have a 
separate code of ethics.  I have difficulties with the professionalism
movement alone.  What you consider important for a software professional
may be contrary to what I feel is important.  Focus on ethics and
certification if you must, but leave Ada and SIGAda alone.

Secondly, we just don't know how Ada *should* be used.  We don't have
enough experience with it.  We don't know which design methodologies
are appropriate for particular applications.  We don't know how to
train people to use Ada as a software engineering language and really
use the appropriate concepts that are supported by Ada.  Various
people in research, government, and industry are looking at these
questions.  Until we really know what is happening with Ada use,
please don't try to "certify Ada software personnel."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arpa: beth@mimsy.umd.edu	Elizabeth E. Katz
UUCP: ...!seismo!umcp-cs!beth	Dept. of Computer Science 
CSnet: beth@umcp-cs		University of Maryland

Of course these opinions are my own.  Valid data supporting conflicting
views readily received and discussed.  I'd love to discuss how you
are using and measuring your use of Ada.