Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada?

[Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On 15 Sep 2003 18:36:02 -0700, aek@vib.usr.pu.ru (Alexander
Kopilovitch) wrote:

>Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>
>> > it would be far too stupid to expect
>> > that such a major system transformation will proceed smoothly everywhere
>> > at the micro-level (where we live -;).
>>
>> It cannot especially, because an overwhelming despise to science and
>> knowledge. Look at the picture of a scientist in Hollywood films and
>> cartoons!
>
>Well, people are right in that despise (which is actually only partial, not
>overwhelming). It was caused by pseudo-scientists of all flavors, which are
>multiplied in increasing rate (like pseudo-engineers in former Soviet Union,
>if you remember) A pseudo-scientist is not necessary a parasite or unskilled
>or stupid or dishonest person - he (or she, these times -;) is just not a
>scientist, but with all visual attributes of one - diploma, degrees,
>vocabulary, workplace, duties and lifestyle. It became possible when the
>numbers of "licensed" scientists increased greatly - number of real scientists
>increased substantially, but at the same time number of pseudo-scientists
>skyrocketed much higher. After several decades of such proliferation of
>pseudo-scientists (and even quasi-sciences), common people became aware of this
>effect... and I don't think that it is Hollywood to be blamed - it was 
>behaviour of those pseudo-scientists in real life that disclosed their presence
>and their numbers.

Actually a typical Hollywood scientist is rather opposite to what you
describe. He is very skilled. He concentrates exclusively on his work.
He is absolutely amoral and often asexual. He wears dirty clothes and
spectacles. His activity could lead the humankind to a catastophe, if
there were no main hero, who crushes scientists's lower jaw in a final
apotheosis.

>> The major problem of bad management is a lack of any desire to hear
>> opinons which differs from your own.
>
>I think that almost everyone would like to hear seriously and skillfully
>considered, beautifully expressed and responsible (that is, backed by some
>form of signing or by reference to external support) opinion, which is offered
>for free -:) .

OK, I suppose the smiley refers the whole sentence (:-))

>>>> Mission critical software in Visual Basic;
>>>
>>>I must confess that I'm sick and tired of those words "mission critical".
>>>What a mission?
>>
>>One of the program.
>
>It is not always clear which mission has a program. I think I saw more than
>one case where different people have different opinions about the program's
>mission.

Such programs should not be even developed. That's a part of the
problem, developing whithout an understanding what the program should
do.

> But anyway, I asked about particular mission - just curious to hear
>concrete enough example of this kind of a blame.

Consider MS-Word. Its mission to help in writting documents. Does it?
(:-))

>> > Imagine that you are offered lucrative contract, which
>> > you think you can easily done... but it is non-negotiable requirement that
>> > all must be done in Visual Basic. Will you reject that offer? Or, if you
>> > accept it, will you develop bad/unsafe/unreliable software, excusing 
>> > yourself by inherent inferiority of Visual Basic?
>>
>> This is the situation we usually have. The question is why these
>> requirements are considered absolute?
>
>There may be trivial reasons. For example, your customer wants to have an 
>opportunity to modify some pieces of the software in some future, without your
>assistance; and he reasonably thinks that it will be some support for Visual
>Basic in the future, and there will be non-expensive workforce for that; at the
>same time he is not sure that there will be comparable conditions for any other
>language, which is equally affordable now. It's enough, isn't it? Notice, that
>is is *his* territory - manager's, and not yours, programmer's. He may or may
>not take consequences from that his decision, but you, as a contractor, most 
>probably will not.

Neither of the reasons you mentioned are absolute. And the language of
implementation is *my* territory. *His* territory is to write the
requrements of *what* the program should do. The common problem is
that this part of work is never done, while *how* to write programs
will be proclaimed on each corner, by people, having qualification and
knowledge of a bath-house attendant!

>And let me remind you that not too much ago in some places exactly Ada was
>considered as absolute requirement; and there were some reasons for that.

Know what, the Mandate was a good thing! The bad thing was, that it
was never enforced.

If the government reguates the speed limit on a high way, it should
also regulate the way the software is developed in the fields of
common interest.

>> Who are those decided that
>> Windows and Basic has to be there? Why they decided so. If you dig
>> just a bit deeper you will find that in 90% cases these decisions are
>> absolutely ungrounded and caused by sheer incompetence.
>
>Perhaps. So what? All people's activities suffered, suffer, and will suffer
>from that, not only programming. Medieval theologists believed that this is
>one of the major consequences of original sin.

True, I too consider Windows as a punishment for our sins!

>> You mean that any popularity would make Ada worse? (:-))
>
>If you mean popularity among professional programmers than perhaps, almost Yes
>(replacing "any" by "radical raise of"). But if you mean popularity among
>scientists and engineers - than No.

Well, didn't Jesus save us? (:-))

>> > > Where you saw cheap subcontractors? (:-))
>> >
>> >Did you mean that you for some reason can't use individuals as subcontractors?
>> >(Otherwise I can't get this your question.)
>>
>> We cannot use cheap individuals! (:-)) To find a skilled programmer
>> with a permission to work in EU and to pay him/her a salary of a
>> supermarket cashier ...
>
>I can't believe that you aren't aware of "virtual contractors".

Actually, I am not.

How virtual is the software written by virtual contractors? (:-))

---
Regards,
Dmitry Kazakov
www.dmitry-kazakov.de