Re: Eiffel for DoD development?

[joe@jsnode.equinox.gen.nz (Joseph Skinner)]

In article <377864$tv@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> dweller@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (David Weller) writes:
>In article <jws-1102941650060001@seeker.tiac.net>,
>Jeffrey W. Stulin <jws@seeker.tiac.net> wrote:
>>> In article <jws-1102940843050001@seeker.tiac.net> Jeffrey W. Stulin,
>>> jws@seeker.tiac.net writes:
>>> >What DOD should be doing is a compromise: keep a short list of accepted
>>> >languages and let each development project choose the best language (from
>>> >the list) for the job.
>>
>>In article <376tq0$84b@dayuc.dayton.saic.com>, James Hopper
>><hopperj@dayton.saic.com> wrote:
>>
>>> When i got out of grad school
>>
>>snip snip snip
>>> i had to learn 5 different
>>> assembly languages in the first 4 years i was working.
>>snip snip snip
>>
>>I strongly agree that standards are important in eliminating confusion and
>>inefficiency. There is, however, much midlle ground between mandating one
>>language for all jobs and having workers learn 5 different assembly
>>languages.
>>
>>As a software professional I think I can probably handle two or three
>>languages on a daily basis. Smarter people can probably handle even more.
>>
>(Dave rolls up sleeves)
>
>OK, Jeff.  Enumerate for me what languages should be used, let me
>start the list (I'm talking about production work, not Prototype or
>R&D stuff):
>   Ada 9X

Rexx for shell scripting and general interface glue.

>
>Now, you list a language underneath it that provides a NON
>overlapping set of functionality.  (Hint: Don't put Eiffel down)
>(Another hint: There are answers, just damn few)


--
===============================================================================
Joseph Skinner                      | Invercargill
usenet: joe@jsnode.equinox.gen.nz   | New Zealand

There is no such thing as a wizard who minds his own business
                          - Berengis the Black
                            Court Mage to the Earl Caeline