Re: Ada policy enforcement

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

In article <4jf65c$9k3@ra.nrl.navy.mil>,
Richard Pitre <pitre@n5160d.nrl.navy.mil> wrote:
>
>So I think what you are saying is that this Law is working fine and there is no
>problem? I assumed there was a problem but your logic is impeccable. I guess
>the orignal post was bogus and I responded to a nonissue. My appologies.
>
It would be naive to think the policy (what you are calling the Law)
is fine. I did not say that. I _did_ make a case - which you evidently
agree with - that it is quite reasonable, and in some folks' opinion,
a responsible way to spend our money, for DoD to _have_ a policy.

Rumors persist that some (who knows how many?) contractors and program
managers are simply ignoring the policy; I don;t have any specific
information. But DoD is a very big complex of organizations (the
central DoD, the various services, etc.), and in any organization
that large there will be disagreement on trhe value of various policies,
and perhaps some outright violations.

It comes down to whether the right authorities have the resources,
the will, and the ba**s to enforce policies. 

Meanwhile, I prefer to concentrate on the interesting  non-defense
projects for which Ada has been the language of choice: avionics,
air traffic control, high speed ground transportation, satellites, etc.

It also makes a great teaching language, as hundreds of profs and
thousands of students will probably attest.

Mike Feldman