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 X-Google-Thread: 103376,c406e0c4a6eb74ed X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!01cc3b7c!not-for-mail Reply-To: "Richard Riehle" From: "Richard Riehle" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <49dc98cf.0408110556.18ae7df@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: ADA Popularity Discussion Request X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: <8HZSc.19547$9Y6.11690@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:01:24 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.81.221.247 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net 1092380484 66.81.221.247 (Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:01:24 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:01:24 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2711 Date: 2004-08-13T07:01:24+00:00 List-Id: "Ed Falis" wrote in message news:opscm64kqg5afhvo@localhost... > On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:41:27 GMT, Richard Riehle > wrote: > > > Are the Ada 83 compiler publishers partly to blame because > > of their greed or shortsightedness? Well, maybe not entirely, > > but there are those in our community who do see it that way. > > > > Richard Riehle > > After putting 16 years of my life into working for one of those Ada 83 > (and 95) compiler publishers, and constantly striving to put good value > products on the street, making zero profit year after year, I have to say > I resent these remarks. > Sorry for posting such a derisive screed, Ed. To quote Laura Huxley (I know you will understand this better than some others who might read it), "You are not the target." The people at Alsys that I know were among those who fought for wider accpetance of Ada in the commercial community. There are others including Randy over at RR, and some of the folks at Meridian. > There are plenty of other "members of the community" at whom fingers could > be pointed. But I'll refrain because it won't change a thing. > I mentioned in my earlier post the "checkbox" compilers. These were among the worst of the Ada offerings. In most cases, the vendor had no expectations that anyone would use Ada on their computer. The compiler was created only to satisfy the checkbox on an RFQ where it said, "Validated Ada." As far as the DoD was concerned, Validated Ada meant that there was a minimal implementation of Ada for a vendors computer. The fact that there were no tools relating to that computer's operating system, no development environments, no way to access the database, and no committment to Ada within the organization, was indication enough that the vendor was not serious about Ada. At least one vendor's VP confided to me around 1989 that, for them, Ada was a "checkbox" compiler. If you wanted to create real programs, you needed to use one of their supported languages, one that supported their proprietary OS. That company no longer makes computers. They have been acquired. This was not uncommon in those times. Most of us had the experience of being confronted with a compiler environment that satisfied the checkbox, but did not have all the tools necessary to create programs easily for the targeted platform. There is a line from "Who Killed Roger Rabbit," where the cartoon character named Jessica says, "I'm not really bad. I'm just drawn that way." One can imagine Ada saying something such as, "I'm not really bad. I've just been implemented that way." In the end, all of us involved in promoting Ada made our mistakes, myself included. In my current role, that of a professor of computer science, I hope I am doing better. My students seem to come away from my Ada classes with a good feeling about it. Still, I encounter people from the DoD, industry, and elsewhere who say to me, "I thought the DoD now forbids the use of Ada." Somehow, the correct message is still not getting out. Richard Riehle