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

[gwinn@res.ray.com (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 I think he meant Ada83 has been superceded by Ada95?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