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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "G.B." <bauhaus@futureapps.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: F-22 ADA Programming
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 19:03:26 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <m2m1d5$477$1@dont-email.me>
References: <a510f410-56ea-46a6-9f3c-021a2389b936@googlegroups.com>
 <f4e05c1d-e52e-44f1-84e1-3814e526c469@googlegroups.com>
 <m2jvqm$qpc$2@dont-email.me>
 <dfa977d6-1458-4d8a-b226-15a759e321d6@googlegroups.com>
 <05dee501-2be0-4b1d-8a52-c3fe8441ea48@googlegroups.com>
 <45d9025e-8d21-405a-b05d-6de62ca8f424@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: nonlegitur@futureapps.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 18:03:17 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="b96887e80893c84a90c3007226ca0d1c";
	logging-data="4327"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+7G7VxOZWnFD869HjMRI5yzWa50PbdenI="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
In-Reply-To: <45d9025e-8d21-405a-b05d-6de62ca8f424@googlegroups.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:M4eHE/pG4RTkI5dLiHP2xMK7T+8=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:22825
Date: 2014-10-27T19:03:26+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 27.10.14 17:51, brbarkstrom@gmail.com wrote:
> we need empirical studies of the sources of
> "market friction" that impedes adoption of Ada

Among the empirically substantiated claims are:

- herd instinct,

- risk avoidance, and

- price.

If there are entities with an interest in empirical studies
of adoption/rejection of Ada, who will be funding the studies?
Vendors, most likely, so science is perceived to be replaced
with bias. Who else? The NSA, maybe, given Tokeneer, but its
reputation has suffered a bit, lately. Also, will studies
be published if they affect the interest of employees
at all levels who are not using Ada?

Anecdotal evidence (helicopters, TTBOMK) claims that an
effective use of Spark/Ada in comparison to C++ has led
to a preference for the less successful C++ because of internal
reporting difficulties: Two teams competed for 1 year.
While Spark/Ada meant no bugs and 100% achievement (C++
meant some bugs and ~80% achievement), late use of simulators,
and progress in theory first, this situation of no visible
progress had led to close-to-heart-attack conditions
in project management. ("Can you show me something?")