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: 1108a1,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: ff6c8,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gidff6c8,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 10db24,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public
From: mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman)
Subject: Re: Ada News Brief
Date: 1996/10/17
Message-ID: <544b8m$duh@felix.seas.gwu.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 189982343
references: <533utt$43p@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us>
 <Dz96K7.Js6@thomsoft.com> <dewar.845384950@merv>
organization: George Washington University
newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.ada,comp.sw.components,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.edu
Date: 1996-10-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <dewar.845384950@merv>, Robert Dewar <dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:

[snip]

>Ada programs are typically highly portable, but it is important not to
>oversell this feature. I once heard the project director for the IBM
>air traffic control system say that Ada 95 must guarantee that their
>application move without changing a single line of code. The mere fact
>that someone could state this obviously unrealistic requirement worried
>me at the time, since it seems to me that anyone working with large
>Ada applications should have a more realistic view.

Hmmm - now that FAA seems to be moving toward using other languages, in
addition to Ada, I wonder if that PM would set the same requirement for
the subsystems written in... oh, say... C++.

Or was this just another subtle exercise in holding Ada to a much higher
standard (unrealistically so, perhaps) than other languages? 

Mike Feldman