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=1.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_50,TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 26 Jan 93 03:37:52 GMT From: srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) Subject: Re: Leffler's Lies: A biased critique of a general Message-ID: List-Id: >Saddest was his statement: "You don't see any financial >communities in the business world using (Ada). It's not out in the >commercial venture any place that I'm aware of." >I wonder how the esteemed general got his stars? It certainly >doesn't look like he got promoted on being well-informed. (Yeah, >yeah, I'll probably be flamed for ad hominem attacks, but I'm >really getting FED UP with people making ill-informed decisions. In the absolute sense, the general is obviously wrong. In any application field you can think of, people are using Ada. However in the relative sense, he is probably right. Outside of the mandated world, Ada use is less than 5% of all total software development. I do not have exact figures, and unfortunately the Pentagon got ripped off by the Mosemann study consultants, who prepared a totally inaccurate survey of Ada and C/C++ use in all sectors of the economy. The fact is that most statements about Ada outside the mandated world are impossible to prove true or false, as the data does not exist. And most economic statements made about Ada in the mandated world are also nearly impossible to prove true or false, because as the GAO pointed out many years ago and still unresolved, is that no one is collecting the data to make such assessments. >Why do people still accept 1985-based arguments for NOT using Ada? Wrong question. It should be "not SUPPORTING Ada?". Ever wonder why there are few entrepreneurs associated with Ada, why other than for a few defense contractors and Ada vendors, there are few companies able to sustain a marketing campaign for Ada tools and libraries? Because starting an Ada business is a good way to loose money, while starting a C/C++ business is a good way to make money. Who the hell is dumb enough to start an Ada business under these conditions? I invested a lot of time and my own money building a large database of information on all of the reusable software available from all of the government agencies, in particular the DoD. I went to a few Tri-Ada conferences, even exhibited, and all I got was a slap in the face. No business from any contractors, no attention from any DoD offices. I even published a column in a Defense journal monthly reviewing freely available defense software (talk about reuse advocacy) and nothing. I learned my lesson and moved to other software arenas. Multiply my experiences many times over, and you'll start to understand why few voluntarily support the Ada industry. Between archiac DoD procurement regulations that discourage reuse (long ago identified but still on the books) and contractors too scared to take a chance in acquiring reusable software, the results are a stillborn Ada support business. About the General, hey at least he mentioned Ada in an interview. It still is outrageous (but at least he's gone) that Strassman never mentioned Ada in any of the interviews in the mainstream computer industry. When everyone else dropped the ball, it was his duty to set the example. He didn't, no one doesn't, IBM still sabotages Ada by not including it in AD/CYCLE and AD/Platform, and Ada goes no where. Start focussing you ire at inept DoD software initiatives and policies. Leave the poor general alone. Instead write letters to your congressman asking why none of the truly inonvative software supposedly being developed by the STARS program is never exhibited at commercial CASE conferences and trade shows? Greg Aharonian Source Translation & Optimization -- ************************************************************************** Greg Aharonian Source Translation & Optimiztion P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178