Re: The future of Ada

[Chris Morgan <mihalis@ix.netcom.com>]

Richard D Riehle <laoXhai@ix.netcom.com> writes:

>  There is another argument in favor of Ada that is beginning to 
>  manifest itself in organizations converting to C++: employee
>  turnover.  
> 
>  It seems that, once the Ada programmers are trained in C++ (we are now
>  doing some of that training), they are more able to present that skill
>  to other employers.  In fact, a large number of Ada programmers
>  who learn C++ register with a "brain-transplant specialist" (recruiter)
>  in search of greener pastures.  Then they need to be replaced.
> 
>  If DoD contractors were more thoughtful about this, they would realize
>  that Ada is a good language choice to prevent employee turnover. It is
>  really important to retain people with a knowledge of the application.
>  And consider the cost of getting security clearances for new hires!  In
>  the long run, Ada is far more cost effective than C++ for DoD software.
>  The problem is that the people making the decision fail to evaluate all
>  the total costs.  The popularity of C++ is exactly the wrong reason for
>  choosing it on a DoD weapon system.

I'm sorry Richard but this reasoning absolutely disgusts me. In fact
it disgusts me so much I feel like writing to all the C++/Java
recruiting agencies explaining how to steal all the worlds best Ada
programmers from defence companies. That might sort out the good, the
bad and the ugly in the defence market. We are not cannon fodder to be
kept away from information that might help us, we deserve as green a
pasture as the next man.

You seem to be saying "keep hold of staff by keeping them from having
a marketable skill". People can see through such tactics. Even if they
work in 100% Ada at the office, how can you stop them developing e.g.
killer Perl skills at home and going to be a webmaster for a bank? You
can't. You have to keep hold of staff by making them want to work at
your company (money, equity participation, technology, management
attitude, any number of factors). In fact you should be able to hire
C++ victims and convert them to Ada.

I worked on a huge Ada project where some of the people got to do C++
and some didn't. It caused a lot of resentment because they failed to
make any effort to improve the lot of the Ada programmers once it
became clear they were paying less than the going rate for
programmers. In fact the management showed some contempt for the mass
of us Ada programmers which were their prime asset. The benefits were
average, the hours long, the technology mostly backwards, yet I liked
it (I got to use GNAT for money). If they had simply paid anything
close to the market rate they could have kept hold of a lot of us, but
they didn't. I would have preferred to continue to work in Ada even at
a small salary disadvantage, but not for a 25-50% one, defence
projects are hard enough work as it is.

I'm not interested in working for a company that pays a lot less than
the going rate for good programmers whatever the language. I would be
even less likely to work for a company that had the attitude you are
recommending. I want them to like using Ada for better reasons than
that. As it turns out, the company in question has had a revelation
and is now writing to all its ex-employees trying to tempt them back.

Sincerely,

Chris
-- 
Chris Morgan <mihalis at ix.netcom.com                http://mihalis.net
 "We're going to start selling Linux to single-party users very
 soon. Q: It's going to be on the menu? A: Yes. You'll go to Dell, 
 pull down "operating system," and click "Linux."         - Michael Dell