From: davew@ObjecTime.on.ca (Dave Williamson)
Subject: Re: "Air Force study recommends scrapping Ada mandate",
Date: 1996/04/11
Date: 1996-04-11T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4kj19u$3ek@silver.ObjecTime.on.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 316ac3c6.259805881@snews.zippo.com
Like the recent posting regarding the 777 and Ada, I am confused at
how the quoted text below justifies the subject line. I see
absolutely no correlation between the quoted text and the statement
that Mr. Paige has abdicated Ada. In the same vein, I could easily
state that Mr. Paige has no use for Eiffel using the quoted text and a
similar subject line.
Are we merely trying to invoke flame wars here, and provoke harassment
by email?
cjames@boss.bod.net (The Right Reverend Colin James III) wrote:
>from Military & Aerospace Electronics 4/96.
>Emmett Paige abdicates Ada on page 25:
>"Emmett Paige, the assistant secretary of defense for command, control,
>communications and intelligence, is one of the Pentagon's chief Ada
>advocates, yet he refused to enter the fray. "I will not get hung up on the
>Ada comments as the study encompasses far more than Ada or any software
>language," Paige said in a prepared statement."
>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
>Colin James III (The Rt Rev'd) cjames@boss.bod.net
>Harassment by email is a felony (Title 47 USC).
>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-04-11 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-04-09 0:00 "Air Force study recommends scrapping Ada mandate", The Right Reverend Colin James III
1996-04-11 0:00 ` Ken Garlington
1996-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Williamson [this message]
1996-04-11 0:00 ` "Subject:" (was: Re: Air Force study recommends ...) 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