Re: C is 'better' than Ada because...

[Craig Franck <clfranck@worldnet.att.net>]

jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) wrote:
>In article <4uopmu$hod@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> Craig Franck <clfranck@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
>> My statement was a hyperbole; an extravagant exaggeration. I can
>> not defend it in a literal sense. The fact the US government,
>> particularly as it relates to the Military Industrial Complex
>> had anything to do with the creation of Ada, makes me highly 
>> suspicous. But to say something is bad just because of where
>> it came from would be to commit the genetic fallacy of reasoning,
>> so I won't comment on that any futher.
>
>Hmmm, how do you feel about using news?  email?  the internet in general?
>All are US DARPA funded projects.
>
>Don't fly at all I suppose either?  Most commercial aircraft are
>directly traceable to their military roots.  Or use the interstate
>road system?  Or...
>
>Now, I'd be the first to say that most things associated with the
>government are pretty bad (useless, worthless, fill_in_the_blank).
>But, as you seem to agree, to reason to the universal here is a bad
>piece of logic.

I'm glad you agree! I was recently told that VCR technology came
from the need to embed detailed information about an area, so a 
cruise missile could fly low to the ground and hit an exact target. 
I love watching movies so, if thats where it came from, I don't care!

Perhaps I could give you some of what I have been told, some 
theories of how programming languages spread. In the past the
government has made proclamations to the effect that if a
compiler for a certain language is not available on a piece of
computing machinery, we ain't gunna buy it. They have said in
the past (and if I'm wrong correct me, because my batting average
is a little low) that they wouldn't buy a computer for data 
processing that didn't have a COBOL compiler. The number crunchers
they were more forgiving on but having a FORTRAN compiler up and
going on a platform, shure did help. That helped these languages
spread. I have been told that what killed ALGOL was not ALGOL-68,
but the fact that IBM gave you a FORTRAN compiler(o.k if they
didn't give it to you with the computer, they still had one) and
getting an ALGOL compiler was more work. 

Now Ada comes along. Want to bid on a contract to do embeded 
systems programming? Do it in Ada, because that's what the
specifications are for the project. Got a neat little 
micro-controller we can put in something? Got an Ada compiler
for it? The point is that when the government throws it's 
weight behind something, it has an impact. Now there are lots
of reasons to do most of your programming in one language.
Saves *alot* of money, no doubt. But if someone say's we have
looked at this problem and we think Smalltalk is the best
HLL to go with and they say "didn't you read the specifications
of the project?, We are going with Ada!" that squews thing's 
in Ada's behalf. 

Now, perhaps I'm wrong again and you can just pick and choose
'tell your harts content on what language you can use on a particular
project, but if that's not the case, then perhaps a case could
be made that even if Ada was designed by the best minds on the
planet, *alot* of it's success came from it being the darling
of the DOD. It's first spefication, I believe, was DOD-1. This
in itself doesn't bother me(like I said, I still rent video's)
but quite often cloat sets standards, not technical excellence.


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