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: 103376,4873305131bf4d94
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: fdb77,4873305131bf4d94
X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,4873305131bf4d94
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,4873305131bf4d94
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
From: Steve Ropa <theropas@dimensional.com>
Subject: Re: Current Ada strengths - was Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!
Date: 1997/10/29
Message-ID: 
 <Pine.SUN.3.96.971029083838.11582E-100000@flatland.dimensional.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 285789247
References: <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com>
 <635csg$2eu$1@news2.alpha.net>
 <Pine.SUN.3.96.971028125423.20605D-100000@flatland.dimensional.com>
 <635u6q$4tk$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu>
Organization: Dimensional Communications
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Date: 1997-10-29T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


On 28 Oct 1997, Robert S. White wrote:

> 
>   IME Ada has worked out very well for difficult embedded systems
> maintained by a team of software engineers for a significant period
> of time.  Stuff like avionics, spaceborne electronics, munitions and
> other things you don't want to fail.  I've heard that some banks also
> found that reliable and easy to maintain software systems are a plus.
> Check out:  http://www.adahome.com for more answers to this question.
> 
>  And again IME it is _not_ hard to teach a new college grad engineer
> (who has never used Ada) how to effectively use Ada in a very short
> time.  With development environments ranging from Rational Apex to
> very nice (but simple) AdaGIDE/GNAT, it is very simple to develope
> Ada code.  
> 
>  Ada's current weak points, IMHO / IME, are in "wizard smart" GUI 
> code generation.

Personally, I would like to see less emphasis on wizards anyway.  I have
had too many developers tell me they knew what they were doing, but when I
took their wizards away, they were lost!  

Steve