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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public 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-ArrivalTime: 2003-04-17 04:19:53 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!news.osn.de!lon1-news.nildram.net!195.149.20.147.MISMATCH!mercury.nildram.co.uk!not-for-mail Message-ID: Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 12:15:32 +0100 From: Tom Welsh Reply-To: Tom Welsh Sender: Tom Welsh 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 References: <3E4E8F8C.9C096985@adaworks.com> <9fa75d42.0302250710.5549baaf@posting.google.com> <3E5C7033.BD5DC462@adaworks.com> <9fa75d42.0302260618.7506cba7@posting.google.com> <3E5CF5C6.84822F57@adaworks.com> <8qkczsAcGcn+Ew83@nildram.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 5.01 U NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.208.100.157 X-Trace: 1050578391 mercury.nildram.net 45186 213.208.100.157 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:62306 comp.object:61230 comp.lang.ada:36234 misc.misc:13387 Date: 2003-04-17T12:15:32+01:00 List-Id: In article , Kent Paul Dolan writes >Tom Welsh wrote: > >> Maybe very clever, experienced >> programmers sometimes seem like >> "computer language theorists" to >> programmers who are not quite so >> clever or experienced. > >Nice try, but with 41 years programming >experience and a wealth of algorithmic >inventions to my name, you'll have to >find someone else to slander. > I think "slander" is an exaggeration; I didn't even specifically say my comment applied to you. It was more along the lines of "if the cap fits..." Anyway, if you take it personally I apologise - I certainly didn't mean to make an ad hominem remark. And I wrote in haste, before having a chance to read enough of your articles and get a clear idea of your experience. I also wrote emotionally, because I like Ada and think it is a valuable contribution to software engineering. My introduction to it was reading Grady Booch's "Software Engineering with Ada" in about 1983, and shortly thereafter taking a two-week training course with Dee deCristofaro (sp?) at DEC's Landover, MD offices. While I was by no means an effective Ada programmer at that stage, I think I understand the basic principles of the language. And I also believed that it was a big improvement on languages like Fortran, Cobol and Basic. The canard that Ada was designed by a committee, by the DoD, or by ivory-tower academics, has been so widely promoted that I tend to have a knee-jerk reaction to it by now. > >[Not all that many people in the world >have ever memorized the logic gates and >software running therein of an entire >computer, but I am one of that few [not >that it was all that complicated a >computer: the guidance computer for the >Polaris Missile; and I did it as a way >to gain promotion in my military >specialty, not for the sheer joy of the >task]]. > Touche! And congratulations. I think we would all be a lot better off it more people had a wide and balanced understanding of computer systems. >[Do you often answer months-old articles >and expect current answers? Are you not >often disappointed?] > Only when they are interesting and I feel the need to speak up. And in this case, you did not disappoint me! 8-) -- Tom Welsh