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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,dab7d920e4340f12
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 10d15b,d730ea9d54f7e063
X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,dab7d920e4340f12
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
From: Craig Franck <clfranck@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: C is 'better' than Ada because...
Date: 1996/08/12
Message-ID: <4um1l9$klq@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 173599798
references: <31e02c32.342948604@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov>
	<4s4adc$l4a@ecuador.it.earthlink.net>
 <31EA0B65.3EF8@wgs.estec.esa.nl>	<31EF7E48.5ABE@lmtas.lmco.com>
 <4ss8ru$3d4@felix.seas.gwu.edu>	<31F28DBD.2A1D@harris.com>
 <dewar.837995420@schonberg>	<31f3c52e.238719470
	<Pine.GSO.3.92.960726122347.25896E-100000@nunic.nu.edu>
	<4tnoeh$qjr@maverick.tad.eds.com>
 <DvGr4I.4C@jvdsys.nextjk.stuyts.nl>	<Pine.GSO.3.92.960809132534.635A-100000@nunic.nu.edu>
	<4uj42h$j06@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> <JSA.96Aug11182145@alexandria>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.cobol
x-mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)
Date: 1996-08-12T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) wrote:
>In article <4uj42h$j06@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> Craig Franck <
>> Realize it's much easier get a C compiler up and running for an embedded
>> system that it is an Ada compiler. To even call it an Ada compiler it 
>> must pass a validation suite. 
>
>First point: Why do you think this?  There seems to be quite a lot of
>evidence indicating that this is not true.
>
>Second point.  Just plain wrong.  If you want, you can call your C++
>compiler an Ada compiler.  Of course, no one will take you seriously,
>but you are free to do so.

Well I'm not an Ada expert, but I have "Ada as a Second Language"
by Norman Cohen and "Ada Programmer Handbook" by Dean Gonzalez.
On the cover a little R with a circle around it appears by the 
word Ada. In the book by Norman Cohen it states (page 8) that 
the name "Ada" is a trade mark of the DOD and it's usage is 
"strictly enforced". I take that to mean that if it doesn't 
conform it *can not* be called an Ada compiler. It states you
can work towards conformity and use the name, but thats an exeption.

If I were to bid on a contract, tell the DOD I'm developing in Ada
and submit C++, I think they would call that "fraud". 

I think part of the resistance to Ada is C belongs to the world.
Ada belongs to the government! :-)

If this has changed, please enlighten me!
 

Craig
-----
clfranck@worldnet.att.net
Manchester, NH
There are no electrons...