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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,66383f4b94d281e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Ada-95 Success Stories
Date: 1996/05/24
Message-ID: <dewar.832914923@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 156517193
references: <4o31vk$cba@news1.delphi.com>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-05-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


tmoran said

"Two years ago I used RR's beta 9X compiler for a financial
data/statistical job.  About 3K SLOC was new (not converted Ada 83).
The client was happy with the result then, hasn't complained since, and
is still in business, so it must have been a success.  ;) But it only
used 'little' Ada 95 features like 'use type', modular types, etc.  and
not 'big' features like tagged, protected, or controlled types so I
don't think it really is an 'Ada 95' success story particularly."

Ted, I think this is a perfectly legitimate Ada 95 sucess story, it is often
the little features that prove really useful, and one thing to be particularly
wary of is the notion that a program is only "real Ada 95" if it uses lots
of the big features. Use only what is needed, sounds like your financial
job was a success, and did not need these big features, nothing wrong with
that!