From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: why? US Army Ada software converted to C++?
Date: 7 Oct 2001 19:39:08 -0500
Date: 2001-10-07T19:39:08-05:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Vu5MWbKlnIGK@eisner.encompasserve.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3BC0F319.C76E4E78@adaworks.com
In article <3BC0F319.C76E4E78@adaworks.com>, Richard Riehle <richard@adaworks.com> writes:
> There is no accounting for the depth of stupidity among those making
> programming language decisions. Unfortunately, this kind of thing
> is more widespread than you might think. On the positive side, some
> better informed contractors continue to realize the benefits of Ada and
> use it for new projects.
If the path of Ada is in fact superior, those contractors will rise to
the top.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-10-08 0:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-10-06 21:56 why? US Army Ada software converted to C++? rob
2001-10-06 23:35 ` David Emery
2001-10-07 1:16 ` Jim44.
2001-10-07 7:31 ` tmoran
2001-10-07 21:22 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-10-07 22:00 ` James Rogers
2001-10-07 23:59 ` Dale Stanbrough
2001-10-08 0:10 ` Preben Randhol
2001-10-09 18:12 ` Marin David Condic
2001-10-09 19:05 ` Ted Dennison
2001-10-09 20:36 ` Brian Rogoff
2001-10-09 22:01 ` Marin David Condic
2001-10-07 1:49 ` Jeffrey Carter
2001-10-07 12:09 ` Larry Kilgallen
2001-10-09 16:03 ` Ted Dennison
2001-10-08 0:28 ` Richard Riehle
2001-10-08 0:39 ` Larry Kilgallen [this message]
2001-10-08 3:26 ` Pi
2001-10-09 16:06 ` Ted Dennison
2001-10-08 10:41 ` Petter Fryklund
2001-10-08 13:20 ` Alfred Hilscher
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox