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,fb93a25131d005d6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Is Ada obsolete?
Date: 1997/02/09
Message-ID: <dewar.855544879@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 217724501
references: <32EFD4D9.33DC91F3@dsto.defence.gov.au>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-02-09T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Peter Williams quotes and asks

<<"ADA (sic)  is best suited to relatively small, highly centralized
computer systems.  Active array radars are at completely the opposite
end of the spectrum, very large and highly decentralized integrated
networks.  Possibly, the time has come to recognize the fact that
decentralization and fully distributed systems have made ADA (sic) as
obsolete as the thermionic valve."

Interestingly no alternative is suggested.  Is this view refutable?>>

Well seeing as Ada 95 is the *only* language that directly supports
"decentralization" and "fully distributed systems", this is a pretty
absurd comment!