From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 28 Jul 93 20:41:30 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland
.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!nic.umass.edu!ymir.cs.umass.edu!rcfnews!sandy@ucbv
ax.Berkeley.EDU  (Sandy Wise)
Subject: Re: Office Naval Research seemingly not interested in Ada
Message-ID: <SANDY.93Jul28134130@beeker.cs.umass.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1993Jul28.171831.14735@rational.com> geneo@Rational.COM (Gene Ouye)
 writes:
   The exact wording of the law is:

           "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after June 1,
            1991, all Department of Defense software shall be written
            in the programming language Ada, in the absence of special
            exemption by an official designated by the Secretary of
            Defense."

   The last I heard, "all" meant all.  I guess technically Greg is wrong
   because it doesn't say "software activities", it just says _all_  DoD
   software _shall_ be written in Ada (notwithstanding blah, blah, blah,
   and in the absence of special exemption, blah, blah, blah).

Then the question moves from the definition of "software activities"
to the definition of DoD software.  Is research done with DoD money
DoD software?  Arcadia is an ARPA project -- we have software in Ada,
C, C++, LISP, APPL/A, HyperTalk, ...  I don't remember seeing any
waivers...
        /s
--
Alexander Erskine Wise /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Software Development Laboratory
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ WISE@CS.UMASS.EDU /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\ This situation calls for large amounts of unadulterated CHOCOLATE! /\/\/\