Re: Is Ada the future? [was: Is C++ the future?]

[dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (David Weller)]

In article <milodCx698o.GIM@netcom.com>,
John DiCamillo <milod@netcom.com> wrote:
>milod@netcom.com (John DiCamillo) writes:
>> Get real.  (Have ya flown into Denver recently?)
>
>Earlier in this thread I made a post that implicitly
>linked the Denver airport "fiasco" with Ada.  Since
>that time I have been alerted that I was the victim
>of an urban legend.  The Denver baggage system soft-
>ware was not developed in Ada, and in no way reflects
>on the capabilities of the language Ada nor its pro-
>grammers.  I apologize for any confusion or damage
>this error may have caused.
>
Just goes to show ya that people want to blame Ada for everything,
even if it wasn't related.  Gee, I never considered Ada as a
computer-language equivalent to Bill Clinton :-)

>BTW, someone from this newsgroup informed me that the
>system in question was actually developed in C++,
>but I have not verified my source, and refuse to make
>the same mistake twice. ;-)
>

Actually (and I know Robin Rowe is pretty serious about this),
there's no indication that C++ was the problem either (and, yes, to
my knowledge, it's being developed in C++ also).  The problem, from
reports I've read, goes back to the old "Do this four year project in
two years, cut corners where you can, and by the way (one year into
the project), here's a list of significant requirements changes."

My humble opinion:  The primary difference between C++ projects and
Ada projects is that developers on C++ projects are MUCH more
proficient using debuggers. :-)  [Extrapolate any way you want to]



-- 
Proud (and vocal) member of Team Ada! (and Team OS/2)        ||This is not your
   	      Ada -- Very Cool.  Doesn't Suck.               ||  father's Ada 
For all sorts of interesting Ada tidbits, run the command:   ||________________
"finger dweller@starbase.neosoft.com | more" (or e-mail with "finger" as subj.)
   ObNitPick: Spelling Ada as ADA is like spelling C++ as CPLUSPLUS. :-)