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,LOTS_OF_MONEY
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,447bd1cf7a88c198
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-27 15:10:05 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.mathworks.com!cyclone.swbell.net!nnrp3.sbc.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Pat Rogers" <progers@NOclasswideSPAM.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <3A4F5A4A.9ABA2C4F@chicagonet.net> <3A4F759E.A7D63F3F@netwood.net>
 <3A50ABDF.3A8F6C0D@acm.org> <92qdnn$jfg$1@news.huji.ac.il>
 <3A50C371.8B7B871@home.com> <3A51EC04.91353CE7@uol.com.br>
 <3A529C97.2CA4777F@home.com> <3A53CB9E.EA7CF86C@uol.com.br>
 <3A5466DE.811D43A5@acm.org> <932aol$ikc$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <932mi6$r2k$1@trog.dera.gov.uk> <9343b1$3g5$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <934iuf$eqv$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <umq1yuixba0.fsf@maestro.clustra.com>
 <937kc7$ssq$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93c0e9$4u6$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <93e33l$tfu$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93ekmo$a14$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <3A6357CF.B80C3666@ix.netcom.com> <3A636F2A.F988973@averstar.com>
 <3A6CEA26.90EACF3D@ix.netcom.com> <94kkme$amg$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <3A71E168.FC629B19@ix.netcom.com> <5sHc6.3635$467.149582@news.flash.net>
Subject: Re: Do we need "Mission-Critical" software? Was: What to Do?
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Message-ID: <VyIc6.34$tt4.103883@nnrp3.sbc.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 17:09:38 -0600
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.191.184.67
X-Complaints-To: abuse@swbell.net
X-Trace: nnrp3.sbc.net 980636981 208.191.184.67 (Sat,
 27 Jan 2001 17:09:41 CST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 17:09:41 CST
Organization: SBC Internet Services
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4613
Date: 2001-01-27T17:09:38-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Ken Garlington" <Ken.Garlington@computer.org> wrote in message
news:5sHc6.3635$467.149582@news.flash.net...
> "Lao Xiao Hai" <laoxhai@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:3A71E168.FC629B19@ix.netcom.com...
<snip>
> DoDD 5000.2-R (Interim), available at http://www.deskbook.osd.mil gives
this
> direction: "Select the programming language in context of the systems and
> software engineering factors that influence overall life-cycle costs,
risks,
> and the potential for interoperability." Depending upon the situation,
this
> may or may not be Ada.

All fine and well, but the DoD couldn't enforce a much simpler Ada-oriented
policy.  Why should anyone expect them to enforce this?  IMHO they've thrown
their hands up in defeat.