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: 28 Jul 93 01:17:23 GMT
From: world!srctran@uunet.uu.net  (Gregory Aharonian)
Subject: Re: Gauntlet gathering rust and dust
Message-ID: <SRCTRAN.93Jul27201723@world.std.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>Agreed that published stats seem cockeyed (listening, Greg?  Keep
>listening...), but what % is classified?  (That statistic is probably
>classified, too :-) But I have a feeling that it's probably < 25%.
>Anybody got real numbers?
>
>Jim Crigler

Of course I am listenting, Jim.  The question is, is Emmett Paige
(overall head of Ada), Lloyd Mosemann (frontman for Ada policies),
John Foreman (head of Ada STARS), and Christine Anderson (head of Ada9X)
listening?  I have no idea why these people are afraid to do an honest
study of what is actually going on inside and outside the DoD with
regards to programming language use, other than maybe embarassment on
a massive scale for the DoD.

One point though, the larger the amount of classified Ada use, the
lower the non-defense programming language gross domestic product for
Ada will be (even lower than my current guess of 2%).  So the more Ada
is actually used inside the DoD, the worse will be its track record
outside the Mandated world.  So this line of arguing actually hurts Ada.

Everyone in the Ada world desparately needs a programming language census
as I have outlined repeatedly.  That no one is willing to fund such a
study is the best measure of Ada apathy and hypocrisy.  The DoD doesn't
fight military wars in the blind - why is it fighting a software war so?

-- 
**************************************************************************
 Greg Aharonian
 Source Translation & Optimization
 P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178