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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucsd!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!ncr-sd!ncrcae!hubcap!billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu
From: billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Meeting Ada's Goals
Message-ID: <8478@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Date: 24 Mar 90 03:41:58 GMT
References: <260A5116.3EDC@tct.uucp>
Sender: news@hubcap.clemson.edu
Reply-To: billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>From chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg):
> In fact, I would go so far as to predict (a hush falls over the
> crowd)... no one language will ever meet Ada's goals.  

   I in turn would go so far as to predict that time and Ada 9X
   will have the crowd, even the skeptics, maybe even Ted Holden,
   out there producing reliable, maintainable software on time and
   within budget with Ada technology.  I would further predict that
   if these skeptics were to read Ada Letters regularly, attend Ada
   conferences, and generally gain a better understanding of the Ada
   community, they wouldn't be writing things like: 

> I suspect that most people who "want to continue using Ada" would drop
> it like a hot potato if the DoD weren't looking over their shoulder by
> requiring it (or planning to require it).  That's just a suspicion,
> mind you, but it's certainly the way I'd feel.


   Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu