Why Ada83ers are rejecting Ada9X

Why Ada83ers are rejecting Ada9X

[Gregory Aharonian]

    I get alot of private gripes about DoD Ada software policies from
people inside the Mandated world.  Most remain private for fear of job loss
and reprimand, and it's hard for me to remove all references for repost without
losing content.  A day of say-anything-you-want-without-fear would
unleash a torrent of criticism and unhappiness, assuming you are interested
in the truth.

    Recently I got a message I could sanitize to the best of my ability
knowing what is done with Internet packets.  It's typical of the stuff I
get, which I post below.  The guy wears a uniform, so it's not me or Ted.

Greg Aharonian

==============================================================================

Greg,

If you are searching for Ada mentions on USENET, daily viewing the group
for a few years, I've seen two Ada references.  This does not comfort me,
I guarantee you.  Also, in comp.object the plurality of mentions are to
Smalltalk, C++ and Eiffel.  Only one Ada reference in this time period, and
all responses were occupied laughing at the thought of Ada83 as an
object oriented language.

Even though your postings are very similar to a stuck CD-ROM, playing the
same digital track endlessly numbing, there's a chance that being
outrageous enough, somewhere, someone will regain consciousness and
take action.  That you have to do this is kind of sad.

I ain't holding my breath for you, though.

In any event, I honestly consider getting to know C++, much as I despise
the idea. The majority of programmers can not afford to charge at windmills;
we must pay the bills - and I have come to believe that Tucker and the rest
of the cohorts of his high-falutin gang are modern reincarnations of the
Man from LaMancha - quaint, naive, and completely, blissfully assured of some
rather idiotic ideas.

No upward compatability! Tagged types!  Gad zooks!!!

I was weaned at a major XXXXXXXXXX company doing business with the occasionally
cerebrally challenged people in defense.  I am confident that you know
the D.o.D methof of running operations doesn't usually foster adaptibility in
working with the non-static software free markets.  Working on a major Ada
program for 4 years and NEVER has reuse been discussed by anyone.  The DoD
client we had did not show a great deal of concern about reuse on the
project.

Summary - I've been coding Ada programs now for many, many years and with no
knowledge about DSRO, VCOE and ASSET, let alone what they could offer to
help the DoD and our company address some probelms.  My fault for not
looking around, their fault for not seeking me out - maybe the blame goes
all around.

About the comp.lang.ada silence, like others I definitely would never try to
extend my head out publicly, with my company's Internet address, and start
my own campaign of criticism.  Am I a chicken?  Maybe, but my family needs
me working full time. No other options. No chances I am going to take.
You must be rich or crazy.

I agree completely that freeing honest market forces into the inbreeded
Mandated world will allow these issues to come to the surface and get the
attention they deserve.  The "hypocrites", as you constantly point out,
would lose market share and contracts and business to companies with the
software expertise and marketing style necessary to succeed in the new
international marketplace.  Don't hold your breath, though, since the
people in charge of ensuring Ada's viability (if there are any) don't
have a reputation for new and original thinking (as illustrated by
the VHDL mishap).

Anyways, keep it hot and keep it coming.


-- 
**************************************************************************
Greg Aharonian
Source Translation & Optimiztion
P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178