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: 103376,125e2c579203591a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) Subject: Re: Ada Jobs: Gaming Industry Date: 1996/10/09 Message-ID: <4vd8ysx42l.fsf@world.std.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 188057594 sender: srctran@world.std.com references: <00001a73+00003610@msn.com> organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-10-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >Note that the Ada 95 product from SGI includes bindings to these SDK's. >SGI has shown some very nice demos of games written in Ada, calling, >for example, Inventor, to provide 3D graphics. Bindings are absolutely meaningless measures of Ada's non-Mandated health if they are only marginally adopted. The DoD blows millions funding the development of Ada bindings, without ever: measuring whether the commercial world wants such bindings, determining how to foster and market such bindings, and measuring who is using these bindings. But overseeing the funding of Ada bindings is a good way to score promotion points, so this wasteful practice keeps on going and going and going.... all the while DARPA is funding non-Ada technologies that the non-Mandated world is adopting. Ada policy management and review has been plague with dishonesty for ten years. Is it any wonder that a majority of even the DoD is rejecting Ada? Greg Aharonian Source Translation & Optimization