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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Xref: utzoo comp.lang.ada:2935 comp.lang.c++:5558 Path: utzoo!yunexus!ists!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!mtxinu!unisoft!hoptoad!hsfmsh!dumbcat!marc From: marc@dumbcat.UUCP (Marco S Hyman) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: Ada Summary: Doomed to success Message-ID: <121@dumbcat.UUCP> Date: 18 Nov 89 06:38:49 GMT Article-I.D.: dumbcat.121 References: <7088@hubcap.clemson.edu> Reply-To: marc@dumbcat.UUCP (Marco S Hyman) Organization: MH Software, Hayward, Ca. List-Id: In article <7088@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes: Non-DoD US users include General Electric, Boeing Commercial Airplane, etc.; other companies, such as Arthur Anderson, are considering converting to Ada now that the appropriate compilers and tools are available. Not because the DoD is using it, but as a simple result of business and engineering considerations. Large corporations such ad GE, Boeing, Arthur Anderson, etc., are not known for state-of-the-art, pushing-the-envelope solutions to their problems. These are the companies that buy IBM. Ada is safe, approved by the government, and, as I once heard Larry Rossler of the HP Language Labs describe it, doomed to success. Too many companies are throwing money at it to fail. The experience so far has been that "once a team moved to Ada, they stayed with Ada. Once Ada had been successfully used within a company, its use proliferated to other projects within the company and to subcontractors and suppliers of that company within the industry." (Ada Letters, Vol. VIII, No. 5, page 15). I don't have any facts or figures but I suspect from my own past experience that this is true of every successful tool/method introduced to a large corporation. A manager that tries something new usually goes out on a limb and therefore works twice as hard to make it succeed. When it does succeed that manager makes sure all of his bosses know that he was the hero that finally brought a software project in on time and within budget. Since software projects are not usually on time or within budget the new tool/method is seen as the solution to all software woes. Alas, it's usually just better management plus the productivity increase that comes with doing something new that really saved the day. I'm not saying the new tool/method, be it Ada, C++, OOP, or whatever, does not help. I just wish that it wasn't seen as a panacea for all that ails the current problems in software. (BTW: the current problems in software haven't changed, IMHO, in the last 20 years -- there's just a lot more software.) But I've changed the subject. Sorry. C++ and Ada are just tools, folks. Sometimes they are the correct tool for the job. Sometimes they are not. // marc -- // Marco S. Hyman {ames,pyramid,sun}!pacbell!dumbcat!marc