* Re: ADA not dead in DOD [not found] ` <3mmh6i$11o@stout.entertain.com> @ 1995-04-20 0:00 ` Drew Hamilton 1995-04-20 0:00 ` Drew Hamilton 1995-04-21 0:00 ` Richard Ramsey 0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Drew Hamilton @ 1995-04-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <3mmh6i$11o@stout.entertain.com> cjames@stout.entertain.com (Colin James III) writes: >From: cjames@stout.entertain.com (Colin James III) >Subject: Re: ADA not dead in DOD >Date: 14 Apr 1995 13:08:02 -0600 >In article <51856@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL>, >Scott . Smart CDR <sws@mercury.nswses.navy.mil> wrote: >> Scott>>Just to show that GA and others are not totally correct when they say Scott>>that DOD management provides no support for Ada, the following is Scott>>from VADM Walt Davis, Dir Space & Electronic Warfare in CNO -- the Scott>>buyer for all Navy C4I systems, as quoted in an internal magazine Scott>>entitled "CHIPS" (April 1995): >> Stop. This gentlemen does not know what he is talking about. James>Stop. For those who do not get copies of Chips, it's a Navy puff-piece James>meant to compete with STC's CrossTalk, but on a much lower level. Clearly you don't read CrossTalk or Chips regularly or you would know that they hardly compete. Not sure what kind of insult you are leveling with the puff-piece comment, but as CDR Smart said, it is an internal magazine. Neither CrossTalk nor Chips aspire to be a refereed research journal. Both provide useful information to military personnel. James>For example, the April issue has a picture of a Vice Admr on the James>cover, and So what? James>articles about user endorsements of various MS-DOS products, and James>how to James>do this or that in Windows or Novell, etc. It's the Navy version of James>PC Computing, filled with editorial opinions from users. Which many internal readers find useful. James>(It's something that experts in "C,C++, and Ada from Houston at NASA" James>might find to be academic and stimulating when not expressing James>resentments about Windows NT or bullying others on comp.lang.ada.) Nice tacky statement which fails to address Smart's original point. The Ada situation in Defense Department is dynamic and hardly uniform. I certainly don't have the "big picture." However, one becomes better informed by getting the views of the senior leadership. So maybe reading Chips and CrossTalk may help you pull your head out of your duffel bag if you are sincerely interested in Ada usage in the Department of Defense. Drew Hamilton ************************************************* Drew Hamilton drew@cs.tamu.edu ************************************************* ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA not dead in DOD 1995-04-20 0:00 ` ADA not dead in DOD Drew Hamilton @ 1995-04-20 0:00 ` Drew Hamilton 1995-04-21 0:00 ` Richard Ramsey 1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Drew Hamilton @ 1995-04-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) I was remiss in not thanking CDR Smart for providing an example of Ada support. Responses such as those from Colin James, III really annoy me. I suppose Mr. James thinks VADM Davis' comments would be more creditable if they were published in the CACM. If Mr. James is interested in Ada usage in the military departments, he might want to read the internal publications he denigrates. Neither present a complete picture of Ada in the DoD, but both contribute to getting that picture. Then in fact I could respond to his posts without the upfront warning that clearly Mr. James doesn't know what he is talking about. Drew ************************************************* Drew Hamilton drew@cs.tamu.edu ************************************************* ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: ADA not dead in DOD 1995-04-20 0:00 ` ADA not dead in DOD Drew Hamilton 1995-04-20 0:00 ` Drew Hamilton @ 1995-04-21 0:00 ` Richard Ramsey 1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Richard Ramsey @ 1995-04-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <drew.61.2F96763D@cs.tamu.edu>, <drew@cs.tamu.edu> writes: > Path: ns.us.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.tamu.edu!slip9.cs.tamu.edu!dre w > > >In article <51856@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL>, > >Scott . Smart CDR <sws@mercury.nswses.navy.mil> wrote: > >> > Scott>>Just to show that GA and others are not totally correct when they say > Scott>>that DOD management provides no support for Ada, the following is > Scott>>from VADM Walt Davis, Dir Space & Electronic Warfare in CNO -- the > Scott>>buyer for all Navy C4I systems, as quoted in an internal magazine > Scott>>entitled "CHIPS" (April 1995): > >> > Stop. This gentlemen does not know what he is talking about. > > James>Stop. For those who do not get copies of Chips, it's a Navy puff-piece > James>meant to compete with STC's CrossTalk, but on a much lower level. > << SNIP >> > > James>articles about user endorsements of various MS-DOS products, and > James>how to > James>do this or that in Windows or Novell, etc. It's the Navy version of > James>PC Computing, filled with editorial opinions from users. > > Which many internal readers find useful. > > James>(It's something that experts in "C,C++, and Ada from Houston at NASA" > James>might find to be academic and stimulating when not expressing > James>resentments about Windows NT or bullying others on comp.lang.ada.) > > Nice tacky statement which fails to address Smart's original point. The Ada > situation in Defense Department is dynamic and hardly uniform. I certainly > don't have the "big picture." However, one becomes better informed by getting > the views of the senior leadership. So maybe reading Chips and CrossTalk may > help you pull your head out of your duffel bag if you are sincerely interested > in Ada usage in the Department of Defense. CHIPS is distributed widely in my place of employment. It's content is widely viewed as an indication of Naval Leadership. Rick ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1995-04-21 0:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <51856@suned1.Nswses.Navy.MIL> [not found] ` <3mmh6i$11o@stout.entertain.com> 1995-04-20 0:00 ` ADA not dead in DOD Drew Hamilton 1995-04-20 0:00 ` Drew Hamilton 1995-04-21 0:00 ` Richard Ramsey
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox