Is General Kind the harbinger of doom for the Mandate?

Is General Kind the harbinger of doom for the Mandate?

[Gregory Aharonian]

 
     It would help those of us who can't afford to goto Ada conferences if
those who did go could report on them here on comp.lang.ada.  Especially
when juicy tidbits of Pentagon policy are floated at the conference.
 
     Case in point is a recent sign of the Pentagon laying the grounds for
the repeal of the Ada Mandate.  As some of you will recall, DARPA started
this last fall by publicly commenting that it didn't matter one way or
another which language was used for its programs.
 
     More recent are the comments of Lt. Gen Peter Kind, director of
information systems for command, control, communications and computers,
who said at the 11th Ada technical conference a few weeks ago (as
reported in the March 29, 1993 issue of Government Computer News):
 
	"We need to stop the language free-for-all and make an
         unbiased analysis of DoD needs.  Put the Ada
	 controversy to bed and clearly articulate"   ... what
	 the demand for Ada products is.
	 Object orientation is needed, he said, and the Defense
	 Department should give C++, Modula and CASE tools
	 "their full day in court" in assessing where Ada stands.
	 But he said he doesn't believe that "if you use CASE
	 tools, you don't need Ada".
	 "We're not going to make a huge change overnight, as I
	 see it".
	 "We're hearing calls to abandon Ada from DoD officials",
	 he said.  "I'm asking contractors to assess it, and
	 they say it does what's needed, but they can't get
	 enough programmers".
 
==============================================================================
 
	Imagine that, DoD officials calling to abandon Ada. Give C++ and
Modula a chance to prove their case.  Not enough Ada programmers being 
supplied by the free markets.  Ask for an UNBIASED analysis  (Sure, go call
the Mosemann study contractors).  Gee, I say these things and Bob Munck calls
me a clown.  Would it help if I started wearing a uniform?  Or just had a
checkbook?

	Even wrapped with a more upbeat message on Ada (as I heard through
the grapevine that he gave), given that watching DoD politics is like watching
Kremlin politics, his comments reflect something is going on inside the DoD.
I wonder if the Ada people in England can place bets at Lloyds on the future
of the Ada Mandate.
 
        Someone better tell the general the dangers of an unbiased analysis,
when the conclusion of a very biased study, the Mosemann reports - TRW part,
concluded that within five years Ada and C++ would be equally economical
for the DoD to use for life cycle systems (or didn't anyone actually read the
Mosemann reports). Imagine how much less time an unbiased study would analyze.
 
	And I still don't see anyone from Ada9X or STARS at public trade
shows and conferences pushing Ada83 or Ada9X, supporting the language, or
even mentioning the language.  Nothing in the press, no donations to the
universities to seed the future (go ask Harris about their recent nine
million donation of hardware).  Nothing, nothing, NoThInH, nOtHiNg, about
Ada anywhere outside of the Mandated world where they have to spend their
own money.
 
	And people call me a clown.  Not that I am not, but I sure ain't
alone.  With overwhelming funding, and overwhelming staff, and overwhelming
mandates, you think the leaders of the Ada movement would successfully
deploy their forces and win the programming language battle.  Maybe we
should rename Ada to  "McClellan".
 
Greg Aharonian
Source Translation & Optimization
 
P.S. And so they will not feel left out, but could someone go to and give
CPR to the ASSET staff.  Maybe when they revive they can post to c.l.a.
a review of what they are doing, the contents of their repository and
periodic postings about new components that they receive.  While you are
there, explain what CDROMs are, why capitalists believe in marketing and
why their component schema makes little business sense.
-- 
**************************************************************************
Greg Aharonian
Source Translation & Optimiztion
P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178

Write the general

[Alex Blakemore]

In article <C4qKzF.1sI@world.std.com> srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) writes:
> Lt. Gen Peter Kind, director of information systems for command, control,
> communications and computers, who said at the 11th Ada technical conference

#        Object orientation is needed, he said, and the Defense
# 	 Department should give C++, Modula and CASE tools
# 	 "their full day in court" in assessing where Ada stands.
# 	 "We're not going to make a huge change overnight,
# 	 "We're hearing calls to abandon Ada from DoD officials",

does the good general have a US mail address?


-- 
---------------------------------------------------
Alex Blakemore alex@cs.umd.edu   NeXT mail accepted