Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96]

Joe Gwinn <gwinn@RES.RAY.COM> writes WRT Re: fixed point vs floating point
>And, I really don't see why it's necessary to deny the failings of
>compilers that have been obsolete for at least a decade, for a now
>superceeded language.  Surely we can find something more current and
>relevant to worry about, to argue about.
>
    Now y'all know that Emmett Paige, et alia all stood up at the last
    TriAda and said "No!No!No!No!No!No! Just because we dropped The
    Mandate doesn't mean we're abandoning Ada!" One can argue forever
    about the rationality of imposing The Mandate in the first place.
    Once it was there, dropping it created *exactly* the perceptions
    Mr Gwinn and *numerous* others have expressed:

    "for a now superceeded (sic) language"

    Everybody in the trenches "knows" that Ada has been abandoned,
    that the DoD doesn't want to have anything to do with it anymore,
    that *all* Defense software is now going to be written in C++,
    that the Earth is flat and that next week Microsoft will be
    announcing its new angle-trisecting software.

    Will this perception *ever* change? Its sad to think that for all
    the merits of the language, Ada has down through its history
    suffered from problems of *perception* and not of reality. (Short
    of the reality that it can't overcome perception and achieve
    widespread acceptance.) The unfortunate thing is that creating and
    believing the incorrect perceptions has the exact impact of
    creating the corresponding reality.

    Is there any hope of correcting the misperceptions? Is the only
    way to do this to get the govt to spend a billion or so on a
    Madison Avenue styled advertising campaign? Or talk Microsoft or
    Sun into doing this for them? I'm beginning to believe that the
    only way to pull the fat out of the fire is with a massive ad
    campaign like the "Intel Inside" or ADM campaigns to get CEO's,
    Presidents, Managers and the general public to become "Ada Aware".
    Maybe we get some Hollywood types to wear little green ribbons at
    award ceremonies? The problem is identifying the stakeholder. Who
    has enough of a vested interest in Ada to be willing to spend that
    kind of money to protect the investment?

    I wish I knew what to do at this stage to help promote the
    language and correct the erroneous perceptions and preconceived
    notions that seem to have haunted Ada from the beginning. We've
    got a big investment in Ada technology and I'd hate to be forced
    to scrap this in favor of some inferior language simply because of
    a lack of "critical mass" necessary to sustain things the way they
    are.

    MDC
Marin David Condic, Senior Computer Engineer     Voice:     561.796.8997
Pratt & Whitney GESP, M/S 731-96, P.O.B. 109600  Fax:       561.796.4669
West Palm Beach, FL, 33410-9600                  Internet:  CONDICMA@PWFL.COM
===============================================================================
    Glendower: "I can call spirits from the vasty deep."
    Hotspur: "Why so can I, or so can any man; but will they come when
    you do call for them?"
        -- Shakespeare, "Henry IV"
===============================================================================

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Jon S Anthony]

"Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96" <condicma@PWFL.COM> writes:

Asks the questions (concerning Ada awareness)

>     Is there any hope of correcting the misperceptions? Is the only
>     way to do this to get the govt to spend a billion or so on a
>     Madison Avenue styled advertising campaign? Or talk Microsoft or
>     Sun into doing this for them? I'm beginning to believe that the
>     only way to pull the fat out of the fire is with a massive ad
>     campaign like the "Intel Inside" or ADM campaigns to get CEO's,
>     Presidents, Managers and the general public to become "Ada Aware".

"Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain."

   -- Schiller

/Jon

-- 
Jon Anthony
Synquiry Technologies, Ltd., Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha!  The way my life's been going lately,
 Who'd notice?"  -- Londo Mollari

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Stephen Leake]

Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96 wrote:
> 
> Joe Gwinn <gwinn@RES.RAY.COM> writes WRT Re: fixed point vs floating point
> >And, I really don't see why it's necessary to deny the failings of
> >compilers that have been obsolete for at least a decade, for a now
> >superceeded language.  Surely we can find something more current and
> >relevant to worry about, to argue about.
> >
>     Now y'all know that Emmett Paige, et alia all stood up at the last
>     TriAda and said "No!No!No!No!No!No! Just because we dropped The
>     Mandate doesn't mean we're abandoning Ada!" One can argue forever
>     about the rationality of imposing The Mandate in the first place.
>     Once it was there, dropping it created *exactly* the perceptions
>     Mr Gwinn and *numerous* others have expressed:
> 
>     "for a now superceeded (sic) language"
> 
>     Everybody in the trenches "knows" that Ada has been abandoned,
>     that the DoD doesn't want to have anything to do with it anymore,
>     that *all* Defense software is now going to be written in C++,
>     that the Earth is flat and that next week Microsoft will be
>     announcing its new angle-trisecting software.
> <snip>

I think he meant Ada83 has been superceded by Ada95?

>     MDC

-- 
- Stephe

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Joe Gwinn]

In article <348F14AE.7AA5@gsfc.nasa.gov>, Stephen.Leake@gsfc.nasa.gov wrote:

> Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96 wrote:
> > 
> > Joe Gwinn <gwinn@RES.RAY.COM> writes WRT Re: fixed point vs floating point
> > >And, I really don't see why it's necessary to deny the failings of
> > >compilers that have been obsolete for at least a decade, for a now
> > >superceeded language.  Surely we can find something more current and
> > >relevant to worry about, to argue about.
> > >
> >     Now y'all know that Emmett Paige, et alia all stood up at the last
> >     TriAda and said "No!No!No!No!No!No! Just because we dropped The
> >     Mandate doesn't mean we're abandoning Ada!" One can argue forever
> >     about the rationality of imposing The Mandate in the first place.
> >     Once it was there, dropping it created *exactly* the perceptions
> >     Mr Gwinn and *numerous* others have expressed:
> > 
> >     "for a now superceeded (sic) language"
> > 
> >     Everybody in the trenches "knows" that Ada has been abandoned,
> >     that the DoD doesn't want to have anything to do with it anymore,
> >     that *all* Defense software is now going to be written in C++,
> >     that the Earth is flat and that next week Microsoft will be
> >     announcing its new angle-trisecting software.
> > <snip>
> 
> I think he meant Ada83 has been superceded by Ada95?

That's right.  I did mean Ada83.

What Emmett Paige also has said in the memos discussing the lifting of the
Mandate is that they dropped the Mandate because it simply was not
working.  Translation:  He was forced to, by market realities.  The DoD,
now with perhaps 3% of the computer market, has lost the power of
command.  When DoD bought 30% of the computers made, they very much had
the power of command.  So, dropping it did no added harm.  I suspect that
he was tired of trying to order the tide back.  Anyway, the Mandate is now
yesterday's war.

Joe Gwinn

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Robert Munck]

On Thu, 11 Dec 1997 12:05:07 -0500, gwinn@res.ray.com (Joe Gwinn)
wrote:
>... the Mandate is now yesterday's war.

But the military always fights yesterday's war today.
Just look at the huge effort they're putting into
preparing for Desert Storm.

More to the point of CLA, the original reason for
the Ada effort, proliferation of languages and the
difficulty of maintaining systems that need old
versions of compilers running on old hosts, is
still with us.  Even as we speak (type), systems
in which the long-gone program manager invented a
flimsy excuse to use C or C++ are in horrible 
trouble because their compilers are obsolete, are
no longer supported, and the language definition
has changed. PMs who were "forward-thinking" 
enough to use Java are suffering from the continual
changes in the language and support systems and
beginning to suspect that Java is little more than
a flash in the pan.

The reason I was suprised that they dropped
the Mandate was that it was such a clear 
admission that the DoD is unable to maintain any
semblance of internal discipline. It's especially
disconcerting that Emmett Paige had to do it.

Bob Munck
Mill Creek Systems LC

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Richard D Riehle]

In article <gwinn-1112971205070001@dh5055146.res.ray.com>,
	gwinn@res.ray.com (Joe Gwinn) wrote:

>What Emmett Paige also has said in the memos discussing the lifting of
the
>Mandate is that they dropped the Mandate because it simply was not
>working.  Translation:  He was forced to, by market realities.  
  ...  delete stuff
>Joe Gwinn

I attended Secretary Paige's Tri-Ada account of the events and information
leading to the abrogation of the DoD Ada policy.  In his speech, Secretary
Paige affirmed that Ada has fulfilled its technical expectations, that it
continues to be a preferred choice for DoD weapons systems, and that the
policy is not being changed for technological reasons.  Rather, if I may
apply my own analogy to his rationale for the change of policy, the
requirement for Ada has been discontinued because a lot of children refuse
to eat their broccoli.  

We put this nice plate of healthful, green brocolli in front of them and
they assumed, from the odd clump of bristles flowering over a forbidding
looking stalk that brocolli would taste bad.  Most of them sat staring at
it for a long time muushing around in their mashed potatos, feeding the
dog under the table and otherwise distracting themselves and others in an
attempt to avoid their broccoli.  

The on-going intractability of rebellious children finally eroded the
well-intentioned resolve of the parent.  Finally, in contradiction to his
widely published statements of determination regarding Ada policy,
Secretary Paige, like many frustrated parents, realized that some children
simply cannot be forced to eat their broccoli.

I recall as a child I too refused to eat my broccoli.  My mother, a
wonderful cook in most respects, simply could not prepare palatable
broccoli.  Only after I became an adult did I discover that broccoli is
actually tasty as well as good for my health.  Perhaps, with broccoli as
an option rather than as a parental demand, more of the recalcitrant
children will, in the future, make the intelligent choice.  

Richard Riehle 

 

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Robert Dewar]

Stephen Leake said, replying to Joe

<<I think he meant Ada83 has been superceded by Ada95?
>>

Maybe, but in the area of discussion (fixed-point handling, and fixed-point
vs floating-point), there is no significant change between Ada 83 and Ada 95,
so this is an irrelevant point. The bottom line here is that despite claims
of problems with fixed-point in Ada 83, we have no details at all on exactly
what these supposed shortcomings were.

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Joe Gwinn]

In article <66vlm7$61q@sjx-ixn3.ix.netcom.com>, Richard D Riehle
<laoXhai@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> In article <gwinn-1112971205070001@dh5055146.res.ray.com>,
>         gwinn@res.ray.com (Joe Gwinn) wrote:
> 
> >What Emmett Paige also has said in the memos discussing the lifting of
> the
> >Mandate is that they dropped the Mandate because it simply was not
> >working.  Translation:  He was forced to, by market realities.  
>   ...  delete stuff
> >Joe Gwinn
> 
[snip]
> I recall as a child I too refused to eat my broccoli.  My mother, a
> wonderful cook in most respects, simply could not prepare palatable
> broccoli.  Only after I became an adult did I discover that broccoli is
> actually tasty as well as good for my health.  Perhaps, with broccoli as
> an option rather than as a parental demand, more of the recalcitrant
> children will, in the future, make the intelligent choice.  

Well, I always liked broccoli, but hated lima beans, and still dislike
them.  Never did grow up, I guess.  Even when the gray whiskers came.

Seriously, I don't thing that Ada's success depended on such trivial
things.  Lots of managers were forcing the programmers to use Ada, also
believing that the problems of Ada83 were just childish resistance on the
part of some programmers.  The problem was that even the true believers
had problems getting it all to work in the early days (I did get it to
work, but it was a struggle in many places).  

Now the problem is simply that Ada stood still for ten years, for whatever
reason, while the UNIX/C/C++ world grew exponentially.  Technical issues
are irrelevant here.  C/C++ folk may or may not be less adept than Ada
folk, but there are orders of magnitude more C/C++ folk than Ada folk, and
some of them are pretty smart.


Joe Gwinn

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Dale Stanbrough]

"Even as we speak (type), systems
 in which the long-gone program manager invented a
 flimsy excuse to use C or C++ are in horrible 
 trouble because their compilers are obsolete, are
 no longer supported, and the language definition
 has changed.
 
I would be truly surprised if this was the case for C. There
is a standard for C, which is very well known, and for which
there would be many compilers which are up to the mark.


Dale

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Robert Munck]

On 15 Dec 1997 02:19:33 GMT, Dale Stanbrough
<dale@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> wrote:

>... C or C++ ... compilers are obsolete, are
> no longer supported, and the language definition
> has changed.
> 
>I would be truly surprised if this was the case for C. There
>is a standard for C, which is very well known, and for which
>there would be many compilers which are up to the mark.

I notice that you're using present tense.  Would you expect
that the majority of C code written ten or fifteen years ago
will compile correctly on these modern compilers and run
successfully on a current UNIX or Windows machine?

Bob Munck
Mill Creek Systems LC

Re: Why it was a bad idea to drop The Mandate.

[Dale Stanbrough]

"I notice that you're using present tense.  Would you expect
 that the majority of C code written ten or fifteen years ago
 will compile correctly on these modern compilers and run
 successfully on a current UNIX or Windows machine?"

Said Bob Munck, replying to my claim that the C standard is
fairly well established.

<supposition mode>
I thought that the current C standard has been around for a few
years now. This is not to say of course, that programmers have
been following it's advise (just count how many programs don't 
start with 

	int main (...

I don't know how much code would run. If it doesn't I don't
think it would be because of a fault of the language (although
I'm not sure exactly when the standard was finalised, or what
has changed since then).
<suppostion mode off>

Dale