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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,bbba36730ac96f9a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Gov't, non-DoD use of Ada Date: 1996/09/10 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 179772610 sender: news@organon.com (news) references: <4vnlgn$mko@uuneo.neosoft.com> organization: Organon Motives, Inc. newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-09-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article gwinn@res.ray.com (Joe Gwinn) writes: > > 3. We may have been born on a weekend, but not last weekend. > > If you limit development to C and C++, and you are the govt, > > you will be sued. > > Not at all. They are buying full-custom, and can have it in any language > they want. And, the main language of the ATC world is C, not Ada, so it > would be hard to criticise their choice of C. There is probably ten times > as much C as Ada used in ATC applications. It matters not at all that > Thompson/CSF has been using and touting Ada. In US FAA ATC? Or world wide ATC? The evidence so far indicated certainly seems to point that the use of just "ATC" here, is a very parochial view. Anyone really know? /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. 1 Williston Road, Suite 4 Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com