* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
[not found] <01bc45df$10fa6480$d27d8ea1@AaBbCcDd>
@ 1997-04-10 0:00 ` Stanley Allen
1997-04-10 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Allen @ 1997-04-10 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Centaury wrote:
>
> It seems that Ada is losing out to modern languages like C++. I don't seem
> to find any wide usage of Ada programming language in the region of South
> East Asia (South East Asians, verify this!).
> [slice]
> Please mail replies to :
> utopian@pl.jaring.my
Isn't it unusual to see this question, and on the
same day see another posting from the same country
with the signature below?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> Adrian, B.Y. Hoe VP, Business Development Email : byHoe@quantum.pc.my
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> member of Team-Ada in Malaysia
Also, these are the first messages I've seen on c.l.a. from
Malaysia. Let's hope it's the beginning of a trend.
--
Stanley Allen
mailto:sallen@ghg.net
mailto:s_allen@hso.link.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
[not found] <01bc45df$10fa6480$d27d8ea1@AaBbCcDd>
1997-04-10 0:00 ` Ada -- a popular language? Stanley Allen
@ 1997-04-10 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 1997-04-10 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
<<If Ada is so powerful and versatile, why isn't everybody opting to use it,
instead of the much complicated (but much preferred) C language?>>
It is an interesting commentary on how people are taught that the only
things that the writer can imagine as constituting "better" for a programming
language are power and versatility ...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
[not found] <01bc45df$10fa6480$d27d8ea1@AaBbCcDd>
1997-04-10 0:00 ` Ada -- a popular language? Stanley Allen
1997-04-10 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
@ 1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
1997-04-12 0:00 ` Ingemar Ragnemalm
4 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Dave Wood @ 1997-04-11 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Centaury wrote:
>
> It seems that Ada is losing out to modern languages like C++.
It seems that as Ada 95 post-dated C++ and Ada 83 post-dated C,
Ada is the more modern language.
> I don't seem
> to find any wide usage of Ada programming language in the region of South
> East Asia (South East Asians, verify this!).
As someone else pointed out, we know at least that Lexical Integration
is using ObjectAda in Malaysia! Ada is also used in Japan, Singapore,
India, Australia, etc.
> And there are no major software companies developing Ada (like C++, Pascal,
> Cobol, developed by Microsoft, Borland and several other big players).
I didn't know Microsoft made Pascal and COBOL compilers. Is that
true?
Companies like Aonix and Rational like to think of themselves as
major (some even make the front page of the Wall Street Journal when
their stock value tanks...), but if you're going to be serious
about this point you certainly can't use Borland in the same
breath as Microsoft, which probably has a longer balance sheet than
Malaysia. Borland isn't much bigger these days than those rogue Ada
companies, and is shrinking at an alarming rate while giving a textbook
example of how to sell compilers for the "most popular" languages (C,
C++, and Java) on the most popular platform (Windows) and still lose
money hand-over-fist. They lost $65,000,000 in the last nine months
of 1996 alone!
Besides, it isn't the size that matters, it's the quality of your
assets.
At least that's what my wife keeps assuring me.
> Also, what does Ada have that other programming languages don't have? and
> what do other programming languages have that Ada doesn't have?
I'm sure somebody will point you to Home of the Brave Ada Programmers
for this kind of material.
> If Ada is so powerful and versatile, why isn't everybody opting to use it,
> instead of the much complicated (but much preferred) C language?
You should be glad that not everyone is using Ada. Using it gives you
a tangible advantage over your less perceptive peers. :-)
But, Ada is used more than you might think. While C is used on vastly
more projects, Ada tends to be used on large, complex, mission-critical,
and safety-critical projects. You're less likely to find it unless
you're looking in the right places, although products such as ObjectAda,
GNAT, RR, etc., are now resulting in considerably more widespread use of
Ada in academia and among smaller projects and hobbyists.
Sit back and watch C/C++ hit the brick wall of Java over the next couple
of years. The stability of Ada can be a blessing.
-- Dave Wood
-- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
-- Aonix - "Ada with an Attitude"
-- http://www.aonix.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
[not found] <01bc45df$10fa6480$d27d8ea1@AaBbCcDd>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
@ 1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
1997-04-11 0:00 ` John McCabe
1997-04-13 0:00 ` Bill Keen
1997-04-12 0:00 ` Ingemar Ragnemalm
4 siblings, 2 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Dave Wood @ 1997-04-11 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Centaury wrote:
>
> It seems that Ada is losing out to modern languages like C++.
It seems that as Ada 95 post-dated C++ and Ada 83 post-dated C,
Ada is the more modern language.
> I don't seem
> to find any wide usage of Ada programming language in the region of South
> East Asia (South East Asians, verify this!).
As someone else pointed out, we know at least that Lexical Integration
is using ObjectAda in Malaysia! Ada is also used in Japan, Singapore,
India, Australia, etc.
> And there are no major software companies developing Ada (like C++, Pascal,
> Cobol, developed by Microsoft, Borland and several other big players).
I didn't know Microsoft made Pascal and COBOL compilers. Is that
true?
Companies like Aonix and Rational like to think of themselves as
major (some even make the front page of the Wall Street Journal when
their stock value tanks...), but if you're going to be serious
about this point you certainly can't use Borland in the same
breath as Microsoft, which probably has a longer balance sheet than
Malaysia. Borland isn't much bigger these days than those rogue Ada
companies, and is shrinking at an alarming rate while giving a textbook
example of how to sell compilers for the "most popular" languages (C,
C++, and Java) on the most popular platform (Windows) and still lose
money hand-over-fist. They lost $65,000,000 in the last nine months
of 1996 alone!
Besides, it isn't the size that matters, it's the quality of your
assets.
At least that's what my wife keeps assuring me.
> Also, what does Ada have that other programming languages don't have? and
> what do other programming languages have that Ada doesn't have?
I'm sure somebody will point you to Home of the Brave Ada Programmers
for this kind of material.
> If Ada is so powerful and versatile, why isn't everybody opting to use it,
> instead of the much complicated (but much preferred) C language?
You should be glad that not everyone is using Ada. Using it gives you
a tangible advantage over your less perceptive peers. :-)
But, Ada is used more than you might think. While C is used on vastly
more projects, Ada tends to be used on large, complex, mission-critical,
and safety-critical projects. You're less likely to find it unless
you're looking in the right places, although products such as ObjectAda,
GNAT, RR, etc., are now resulting in considerably more widespread use of
Ada in academia and among smaller projects and hobbyists.
Sit back and watch C/C++ hit the brick wall of Java over the next couple
of years. The stability of Ada can be a blessing.
-- Dave Wood
-- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
-- Aonix - "Ada with an Attitude"
-- http://www.aonix.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
@ 1997-04-11 0:00 ` John McCabe
1997-04-12 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1997-04-13 0:00 ` Bill Keen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: John McCabe @ 1997-04-11 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Dave Wood <dpw@aonix.com> wrote:
>Centaury wrote:
>>
>> It seems that Ada is losing out to modern languages like C++.
>
>It seems that as Ada 95 post-dated C++ and Ada 83 post-dated C,
>Ada is the more modern language.
I read something the other day that said C++ was fourteen years old
yet still not mature. That makes it approximately the same age as Ada
83.
Best Regards
John McCabe <john@assen.demon.co.uk>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
1997-04-11 0:00 ` John McCabe
@ 1997-04-12 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1997-04-14 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
0 siblings, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Nick Roberts @ 1997-04-12 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
John McCabe <john@assen.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<334e73be.939766@news.demon.co.uk>...
> Dave Wood <dpw@aonix.com> wrote:
>
> >Centaury wrote:
> >>
> >> It seems that Ada is losing out to modern languages like C++.
> >
> >It seems that as Ada 95 post-dated C++ and Ada 83 post-dated C,
> >Ada is the more modern language.
>
> I read something the other day that said C++ was fourteen years old
> yet still not mature. That makes it approximately the same age as Ada
> 83.
On the other hand, to be fair, C++ is a rapidly evolving language -
evolving as we speak - whereas Ada 95 is fixed, and likely to remain fixed
for some time to come. I think advantages and disadvantages can be picked
out of both situations: the stability of Ada is an obvious advantage, but
it will age, just as Ada 83 aged; the transience of C++ causes headaches
for programmers and implementors alike, but C++ is, and will continue to
be, incorporating new advances (and indeed fashions) in programming
science.
I believe Ada is a better programming language - not just better for some
things, but better entirely - than C++ (and I do know both intimately - I
use C++ all the time for commercial projects). That commercial forces are
able to promote C++ so successfully I find an abomination. Engineering is
not supposed to be like that. All we Adaphiles can do is to keep gently
promoting Ada in our different ways, and hope that nature eventually is
allowed to take its course.
The true reason why Ada is not a very popularly used programming language
has nothing to do with the merits or demerits of the language, nor with the
preferences of programmers. It is almost entirely to do with the decisions
taken at a high level by managers whose decisions have little to do with
technicalities (but rather the safety of their jobs, promotional prospects,
etc). We must keep trying to convince them to specify Ada. In some cases,
lives really do depend on it. We may laugh about Airbus (and others), but
the relatives of the victims of those disasters aren't laughing.
Engineering is an honourable profession. Engineers who build apartment
blocks, or bridges, or airplanes, don't shrug their shoulders and say "oh
well, it may not be well built, but never mind, eh?" They take a pride in
what they do, and they know that the quality of what they do is important.
We need to spread this message to programmers, and their bosses.
Finally, it is a simple engineering principle that your work is only as
good as your tools. Ada is the better tool.
Now for a beer ...
Nick.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
1997-04-12 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
@ 1997-04-14 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Dale Stanbrough @ 1997-04-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Bill Keen writes:
"If they'd given away free Ada compilers with every Unix box sold things
might have developed on different lines. These days we can use GNAT for
free, but not for commercial work. Customers tend to demand a validation
certificate, and validated compilers still tend to cost a lot more than
the competition."
Wow, so many mistakes in so few words!
If customers "demand a validation certificate" why would they want to use
another language where the compilers are not validated? So this makes no
diff. to language choice.
...and then the really funny...
'we can't use GNAT for commercial work'
Chortle, chortle. Too many beers Bill? :-) (really either at best
total ignorance of the GNU license, at worst idealogically driven fibs).
...and then validated compilers (e.g. the free GNAT compiler) cost more
than the competition. If this is true, Bill, could you tell me who the
competition is? They obviously pay me to use their compiler! :-)
Dale
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
1997-04-11 0:00 ` John McCabe
@ 1997-04-13 0:00 ` Bill Keen
[not found] ` <5ivrre$en0@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 26+ messages in thread
From: Bill Keen @ 1997-04-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <01bc479c$dc234320$22f482c1@xhv46.dial.pipex.com>, Nick
Roberts <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> writes
>The true reason why Ada is not a very popularly used programming language
>has nothing to do with the merits or demerits of the language, nor with the
>preferences of programmers. It is almost entirely to do with the decisions
>taken at a high level by managers whose decisions have little to do with
>technicalities
The slow takeoff of Ada also has to do with the cost of compilers. In
the late eigthies we used to buy Ada cross compilers for many times the
cost of the PCs we ran them on, and these were high spec PCs for those
day. And the cost of compilers is dictated by mandatory validation.
Apart from hiring a team of hotshots to write the compiler, and paying
for the initial validation, the compiler vendors have to retain them to
revalidate each time the ACVC is reissued. In the eighties this was an
annual event, though it relaxed after 1991 (I think) to every 18 month.
(I don't know the frequency of ACVC 2.x updates for Ada 95.) But the
competition has no such handicap.
If they'd given away free Ada compilers with every Unix box sold things
might have developed on different lines. These days we can use GNAT for
free, but not for commercial work. Customers tend to demand a validation
certificate, and validated compilers still tend to cost a lot more than
the competition.
--
Bill Keen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
[not found] <01bc45df$10fa6480$d27d8ea1@AaBbCcDd>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
@ 1997-04-12 0:00 ` Ingemar Ragnemalm
4 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Ingemar Ragnemalm @ 1997-04-12 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Centaury wrote:
>
> If Ada is so powerful and versatile, why isn't everybody opting to use it,
> instead of the much complicated (but much preferred) C language?
Any time someone makes a great product that promises to make work
different and
easier, it threatens the oldtimers, who will backtalk it to no end. If
something
is complicated to use, easy to mess up, it means more power to the
experts.
The opposite means that the experts are losing ground.
I am no Ada expert, but as far as I know Ada (VERY little) it is a
modern, very
readable language, related to Pascal but more standardized. Readable
code means
that anyone can pick up your code and modify it. So, C programmers are
backtalking
both Ada and Pascal, since it threatens them, makes them easier to
replace.
I know C well, and think it is a horrible language. Someone called it a
"glorified
macro assembler", which is quite true. Just look at its "for" statements
and its
case switches. The for is just a kind of macro, and the case switch is a
jump
table.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
@ 1997-04-16 0:00 Adrian B.Y. Hoe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Adrian B.Y. Hoe @ 1997-04-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
On Fri, 11 Apr 1997 23:06:11 -0500, "Automatic digest processor"
<LISTSERV@LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU> wrote:
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 21:58:06 -0500
> From: Stanley Allen <sallen@GHGCORP.COM>
> Subject: Re: Ada -- a popular language?
>
> Centaury wrote:
> >
> > It seems that Ada is losing out to modern languages like C++. I don't seem
> > to find any wide usage of Ada programming language in the region of South
> > East Asia (South East Asians, verify this!).
> > [slice]
> > Please mail replies to :
> > utopian@pl.jaring.my
>
> Isn't it unusual to see this question, and on the
> same day see another posting from the same country
> with the signature below?
>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > Adrian, B.Y. Hoe VP, Business Development Email : byHoe@quantum.pc.my
> >
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > member of Team-Ada in Malaysia
>
> Also, these are the first messages I've seen on c.l.a. from
> Malaysia. Let's hope it's the beginning of a trend.
>
> --
> Stanley Allen
> mailto:sallen@ghg.net
> mailto:s_allen@hso.link.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 18:42:38 GMT
> From: Centaury <utopian@PL.JARING.MY>
> Subject: Ada -- a popular language?
>
> It seems that Ada is losing out to modern languages like C++. I don't seem
> to find any wide usage of Ada programming language in the region of South
> East Asia (South East Asians, verify this!).
> And there are no major software companies developing Ada (like C++, Pascal,
> Cobol, developed by Microsoft, Borland and several other big players).
> Also, what does Ada have that other programming languages don't have? and
> what do other programming languages have that Ada doesn't have?
>
> If Ada is so powerful and versatile, why isn't everybody opting to use it,
> instead of the much complicated (but much preferred) C language?
>
>
> --
> Please mail replies to :
> utopian@pl.jaring.my
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 01:47:43 -0700
> From: Dave Wood <dpw@AONIX.COM>
> Subject: Re: Ada -- a popular language?
>
> Centaury wrote:
> >
> > It seems that Ada is losing out to modern languages like C++.
>
> It seems that as Ada 95 post-dated C++ and Ada 83 post-dated C,
> Ada is the more modern language.
>
> > I don't seem
> > to find any wide usage of Ada programming language in the region of South
> > East Asia (South East Asians, verify this!).
>
> As someone else pointed out, we know at least that Lexical Integration
> is using ObjectAda in Malaysia! Ada is also used in Japan, Singapore,
> India, Australia, etc.
>
> > And there are no major software companies developing Ada (like C++, Pascal,
> > Cobol, developed by Microsoft, Borland and several other big players).
>
> I didn't know Microsoft made Pascal and COBOL compilers. Is that
> true?
>
> Companies like Aonix and Rational like to think of themselves as
> major (some even make the front page of the Wall Street Journal when
> their stock value tanks...), but if you're going to be serious
> about this point you certainly can't use Borland in the same
> breath as Microsoft, which probably has a longer balance sheet than
> Malaysia. Borland isn't much bigger these days than those rogue Ada
> companies, and is shrinking at an alarming rate while giving a textbook
> example of how to sell compilers for the "most popular" languages (C,
> C++, and Java) on the most popular platform (Windows) and still lose
> money hand-over-fist. They lost $65,000,000 in the last nine months
> of 1996 alone!
>
> Besides, it isn't the size that matters, it's the quality of your
> assets.
> At least that's what my wife keeps assuring me.
>
> > Also, what does Ada have that other programming languages don't have? and
> > what do other programming languages have that Ada doesn't have?
>
> I'm sure somebody will point you to Home of the Brave Ada Programmers
> for this kind of material.
>
> > If Ada is so powerful and versatile, why isn't everybody opting to use it,
> > instead of the much complicated (but much preferred) C language?
>
> You should be glad that not everyone is using Ada. Using it gives you
> a tangible advantage over your less perceptive peers. :-)
>
> But, Ada is used more than you might think. While C is used on vastly
> more projects, Ada tends to be used on large, complex, mission-critical,
> and safety-critical projects. You're less likely to find it unless
> you're looking in the right places, although products such as ObjectAda,
> GNAT, RR, etc., are now resulting in considerably more widespread use of
> Ada in academia and among smaller projects and hobbyists.
>
> Sit back and watch C/C++ hit the brick wall of Java over the next couple
> of years. The stability of Ada can be a blessing.
>
> -- Dave Wood
> -- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
> -- Aonix - "Ada with an Attitude"
> -- http://www.aonix.com
>
> ------------------------------
Obviously, Centaury did not know that somebody are using Ada in Malaysia.
And obviously, many Malaysian do not know that. Many software developers
would not care about Ada simply they want cheap compilers and get their
products developed and deployed into the market at no time at all.
Maximizing profits and minimizing development time and overhead is a norm.
Lexical Integration (M) Sdn Bhd is Aonix distributor and business partner
in Malaysia. Check it out in <www.aonix.com/Sales/icon.html>
esp Motives, a new subsidiary of Lexical Integration, will be entirely
focusing in Ada development projects. Concept explorations have been done
in ObjectAda. esp Motives is creating a need of Ada engineers in Malaysia.
Check it out in <www.acm.org/sigada/jobs/jobs.html> Thanks to Sherri Braxton
for listing our job posting in ACM SigAda.
May I suggest Centaury to contact me at byHoe@quantum.pc.my for more
information?
--
B.Y.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Adrian, B.Y. Hoe VP, Business Development Email : byHoe@quantum.pc.my
\/ Lexical Integration (M) Sdn Bhd
\/ \/ 13-B Jln Pandan Indah 4/2
\/ \/ \/ Pandan Indah
\/ \/ 55100 Kuala Lumpur
\/ Malaysia
Tel : +60 3 495 4048
Fax : +60 3 495 4037
Email : system@quantum.pc.my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
member of Team-Ada in Malaysia
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread* Re: Ada -- a popular language?
@ 1997-04-16 0:00 Adrian B.Y. Hoe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 26+ messages in thread
From: Adrian B.Y. Hoe @ 1997-04-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
On Fri, 11 Apr 1997 23:06:11 -0500, "Automatic digest processor"
<LISTSERV@LISTSERV.NODAK.EDU> wrote:
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 00:44:23 -0700
> From: Dave Wood <dpw@AONIX.COM>
> Subject: Re: OpenGL for ObjectAda
>
> Adrian B.Y. Hoe wrote:
> >
> > Hello:
> >
> > I have OA 7.0 for Windows, Prof edition with OpenPack and
> > I understand that opengl32.lib is supplied and can be found in
> >
> > \ObjectAda\APILIB\
> >
> > Unfortunately, I can't find any documentation or sample codes
> > with it.
> >
> > Can anybody help?
>
> You will find the OpenGL binding in the win32ada bindings
> folder in the files gl*.*.
>
> There are a number of books on the market describing
> OpenGL in the context of Win32. You might investigate one
> of them for guidance.
>
> You will find this and many other useful bits of information
> discussed in the ObjectAda for Windows FAQ. At present, this
> document is available from our customer support, or I can
> email it to you as a Word attachment if you send me an email
> request.
>
> The FAQ is currently being updated for the pending 7.1 release.
> Once it has been updated, it will be placed on the 7.1 CD as
> well as on the Aonix web site.
>
> -- Dave Wood
> -- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
> -- Aonix - "Ada with an Attitude"
>
Dave:
Thanks! We have struggle through the OpenGL and thanks to Ed Fallis and
Pascal Obry too for the OpenGL samples and also their replies regarding
the discrepancies of OpenGL library in OA 7.0
Here, we await 7.1
Regards.
--
B.Y.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Adrian, B.Y. Hoe VP, Business Development Email : byHoe@quantum.pc.my
\/ Lexical Integration (M) Sdn Bhd
\/ \/ 13-B Jln Pandan Indah 4/2
\/ \/ \/ Pandan Indah
\/ \/ 55100 Kuala Lumpur
\/ Malaysia
Tel : +60 3 495 4048
Fax : +60 3 495 4037
Email : system@quantum.pc.my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
member of Team-Ada in Malaysia
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 26+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1997-04-25 0:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <01bc45df$10fa6480$d27d8ea1@AaBbCcDd>
1997-04-10 0:00 ` Ada -- a popular language? Stanley Allen
1997-04-10 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
1997-04-11 0:00 ` Dave Wood
1997-04-11 0:00 ` John McCabe
1997-04-12 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1997-04-14 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
1997-04-13 0:00 ` Bill Keen
[not found] ` <5ivrre$en0@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com>
1997-04-15 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
[not found] ` <5j4kfi$1g1@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com>
1997-04-17 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-04-20 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1997-04-21 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-04-16 0:00 ` Byron
1997-04-18 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-04-19 0:00 ` Michael Feldman
1997-04-21 0:00 ` Dave Smith
1997-04-23 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1997-04-23 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-04-25 0:00 ` Latin1 Peter Hermann
1997-04-19 0:00 ` Ada -- a popular language? Michael Feldman
[not found] ` <5ivta3$en0@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com>
[not found] ` <5j04g7$42s@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
[not found] ` <5j11vb$h86$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
1997-04-16 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
[not found] ` <JSA.97Apr16143427@alexandria>
[not found] ` <5j4kli$1g1@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com>
1997-04-17 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
[not found] ` <dewar.861244012@merv>
1997-04-19 0:00 ` Tom Wheeley
1997-04-12 0:00 ` Ingemar Ragnemalm
1997-04-16 0:00 Adrian B.Y. Hoe
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1997-04-16 0:00 Adrian B.Y. Hoe
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox