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=2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_MSGID, MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f849b,857262ad7d0ad537 X-Google-Attributes: gidf849b,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,c2f4cdd9ccfb8ede X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: rawcswi@my-deja.com Subject: Re: How many different processors do you use? Date: 1999/06/10 Message-ID: <7jol96$kji$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 487915467 References: <7j1qng$4fp$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <37576ded.26569745@news.mpx.com.au> <7j8ac0$eah$1@uranium.btinternet.com> <7jh07e$tek$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7jhp34$6f1$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7jjij7$qci$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7jk7hk$36s$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7jm5pa$ome$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7jmmqi$vm2$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x26.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 165.189.180.55 Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Jun 10 15:23:30 1999 GMT Newsgroups: comp.arch.embedded,comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/2.0 (compatible; MSIE 3.02; Win32) Date: 1999-06-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <7jmmqi$vm2$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Robert Dewar wrote: > In article <7jm5pa$ome$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, > muddy_buddy@my-deja.com wrote: > > In article <7jk7hk$36s$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, > > Robert Dewar wrote: > > > In article <7jjij7$qci$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, > > > muddy_buddy@my-deja.com wrote: > > > > 2. The Reagen adminstration was so anti-gov that they > didn't > > > > fund a quality free or at least cheap Ada development > system > > > > for education, and small companies. > > > > > > This claim is not even vagely related to reality. > > > > It was a major factor. > > (lots of irrelevant stuff snipped) > > Nope! You completely missed what I said was not related > to reality, and that is the claim that the failure to support > a quality free Ada development system was due to some kind of > Reagan anti-gov attitude, that's complete nonsense. And I am > the person to know, since I am the person who lobbied for this > for many years, and finally succeeded with Chris Anderson's > support in getting this to happen. In fairness to muddy_buddy, there is a vague connection to reality-- the Reagan administration did have an effect on funding for academic research, for example. And he was talking about the interpretation of Reagan's policies by those who were (in his view) responsible for promoting or not promoting Ada. If the government during the early 80's had dropped a lot of money into promoting Ada use in universities, many of them would have started to use it (it supplied a standardized language with concurrency, exceptions and other things that the more common teaching language Pascal didn't offer) and Ada might be more popular today (popular as it may be in some areas, I haven't seen much use for my modest knowledge of Ada except to speed learning of Oracle PL/SQL). But the Reagan administration also put a lot of money into the military, which must have included Ada (what were they planning to program the Strategic Defense Initiative in?), and my impression of the history of GNAT is that the government funded the initial GPLed Ada compiler (GNAT or the GNAT precursor?), as a conscious choice to make an Ada compiler freely available. Is this an accurate understanding of the lobbying and support from Chris Anderson you refer to? -- MJSR Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don't.