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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-10 10:11:22 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? References: <9keolvs9tjbbbuv1ndnsr69af7mtddemhk@4ax.com> <3F5F1ADB.1070008@noplace.com> In-Reply-To: <3F5F1ADB.1070008@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:56:32 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.223.163 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1063212979 198.96.223.163 (Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:56:19 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:56:19 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42354 Date: 2003-09-10T12:56:32-04:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: .. > As for the languages being selected for a lot of these projects? There > are probably lots of factors (technical and business) that are figuring > into the decisions that are not obvious from the outside. Ultimately, > you can build good software in any language - if you're willing to incur > the costs associated with shoring up the weaknesses of the given > language. It usally involves more than cost. You need the right people along side the mindset to succeed. Some people just plain succeed with less "influence" using some tools than others. Progressive I.T. shops try to do the "leadership" thing, while others use "management" (big stick) approach instead. With either approach, it still is a lot like herding cats. Ada however, can enforce certain things more easily without involving the politics of design concepts (limited types, access type restrictions, visibility rules etc.) Trying to enforce good software design in wide open environments like assembly language, C or BASIC is difficult for large teams. Team members will always rebell against guidelines in the name of deadlines, efficiency or their own concept of design principles. I suppose your point still holds that it still comes down to costs of dealing with the people issues, in addition to the other factors. But I do like the aspect that Ada removes the politic of certain design concepts. You don't have to tell your programmers to avoid assignment of limited types for example. Getting them to use limited types however, may be a different story ;-) -- Warren W. Gay VE3WWG http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg