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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-01 07:45:18 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: softeng3456@netscape.net (soft-eng) Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died (was): 64 bit addressing and OOP Date: 1 May 2003 07:45:18 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <9fa75d42.0305010645.7a5572ed@posting.google.com> References: <9fa75d42.0304300412.3c9f8157@posting.google.com> <98BC68183770643E.43B22CFE5F4D5EFD.5566989BE627964B@lp.airnews.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 32.97.239.29 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1051800318 9130 127.0.0.1 (1 May 2003 14:45:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 May 2003 14:45:18 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:62981 comp.object:62468 comp.lang.ada:36808 misc.misc:13863 Date: 2003-05-01T14:45:18+00:00 List-Id: "John R. Strohm" wrote in message news:<98BC68183770643E.43B22CFE5F4D5EFD.5566989BE627964B@lp.airnews.net>... > "soft-eng" wrote in message > news:9fa75d42.0304300412.3c9f8157@posting.google.com... > > Richard Riehle wrote in message > news:<3EAF3464.9E06145F@adaworks.com>... > > > > > > Sorry you had such bad Ada training. There was a lot of that > > > going around at one time, perpetrated by people who simply > > > failed to understand some elementary ideas and made them > > > more complicated than necessary. > > > > Do you really think my views on Ada are a result of > > bad training? > > > > I suppose that is a very fair representation of the > > analysis and insight capabilities of those who > > choose to espouse the cause you are championing here... > > Why don't you *tell* us where your views on Ada come from? > > So far, you have said a great deal that suggests that you have NO actual > experience with Ada. Mostly peripheral and theoretical. Taught Ada to graduate students for evening class. Had to learn about it from an academic viewpoint. Did have some previous familiarity during my own graduate school work, because lots of people were thinking that's where the grants would be coming from, and there was very high academia interest in Ada. I even owned a copy of the first language manual sets, that came out right after the announcement "Ada is green". (Talking of "green", briefly also worked with some ex-"red" team members.) Also briefly worked with some government Ada type people (my own project was a proof-of-concept prototype for some small-potatoes $5 mill contract, and therefore my project had an "exception" or something so I could work in C, which was very much of a break and I could wrap it up quickly), and got to observe their behaviors. No recent experience at all, but of course, any recent changes to Ada had little to do with the collapsing of the Ada mandate. These days, probably even Add-1-to-Cobol is object oriented, and I would be surprised if Ada-2002 (or whatever) weren't virtually a copy of Java or C++. I figure I already know Java and C++...