billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) (11/16/89)
>> [...] There is the August 21 89 issue of Government Computer News >> describing the problems which the huge FAA Advanced Automation System is >> having due to IBM Ada implementations and tools (or lack thereof). Apparently IBM has now changed its tune; its recent brochure entitled "Ada and IBM... Capability and Committment" states: IBM is committed to Ada. Ada's support for modern software engineering concepts, its breadth of application, and its support for reuseable software components place it squarely in the forefront as a language of choice for both IBM's software engineers and for IBM's customers. Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu
ryer@inmet.inmet.com (11/17/89)
Last I heard, Ada is not on the list of _acceptable_ languages for IBM's SAA (Systems Application Architecture?) applications. (SAA is IBM's big new advance in portability and interoperability and a fundamental part of their strategy for computing in the 90's). If a program is coded in Ada, it can't comply with SAA, regardless of any other compatibility or interfaces. Has this changed? It is easy to write a brochure, but where's the beef? Mike Ryer (personal comment, not endorsed by my employer, Intermetrics)
billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) (11/19/89)
From ryer@inmet.inmet.com: > Last I heard, Ada is not on the list of _acceptable_ languages for IBM's > SAA (Systems Application Architecture?) applications. According to IBMers at Tri-Ada '89, Ada runs on three of the four platforms required for SAA-hood, and they're working on the fourth. Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu
rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (11/19/89)
billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) writes in response to Ted Holden's comments about problems... > >> ...due to IBM Ada implementations and tools (or lack thereof). > Apparently IBM has now changed its tune; its recent brochure > entitled "Ada and IBM... Capability and Committment" states: > IBM is committed to Ada... So what? First, Ted did not address the question of whether IBM is committed to Ada; he was talking about a report of real-world problems. Second, "commitment" is not measured by glowing words in a brochure. Do you really think IBM would put out a brochure that said "Well, we're not really keen on Ada, but it looks like we need it..."? Wanna buy a bridge? I'm committed to selling you the finest bridge. It's got support for modern engineering...hey, it supports lots of things. It's got breadth of application...you can apply it to any need as broad as the bridge is wide... Sheesh...it's marketing. Do you believe every piece of advertising you read? Find out what's behind it. What has IBM got for Ada? Better yet, if you want to measure commitment, find out how much new software THEY're writing in Ada (as opposed to assembly language, or PL/S, or C, or...) Do you really want a bold commitment from the company that gave us PL/I? (Save the flames...yes, I know a lot of good software was written in PL/I. It's still uglier than yesterday's roadkill.) -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com uucp: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd (303)449-2870 ...`Just say no' to mindless dogma.
lee@sq.sq.com (Liam R. E. Quin) (11/20/89)
billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu wrote: > [...] "Ada and IBM... Capability and Committment" states: > IBM is committed to Ada. Ada's support for modern software > engineering concepts, its breadth of application, and its > support for reuseable software components place it squarely > in the forefront as a language of choice for both IBM's > software engineers and for IBM's customers. No doubt the simple elegance of Ada appealed to IBM, depite their well-known dislike of such small languages. Lee :-) -- Liam R. Quin, Unixsys (UK) Ltd [note: not an employee of "sq" - a visitor!] lee@sq.com (Whilst visiting Canada from England) lee@anduk.co.uk (Upon my return to England at Christmas)
jcallen@Encore.COM (Jerry Callen) (11/20/89)
In article <20600018@inmet> ryer@inmet.inmet.com writes: > >Last I heard, Ada is not on the list of _acceptable_ languages for IBM's >SAA (Systems Application Architecture?) applications. (SAA is IBM's big >new advance in portability and interoperability and a fundamental part >of their strategy for computing in the 90's). If a program >is coded in Ada, it can't comply with SAA, regardless of any other >compatibility or interfaces. Has this changed? It is easy to write >a brochure, but where's the beef? > >Mike Ryer >(personal comment, not endorsed by my employer, Intermetrics) Hi, Mike! Actually, the "SAA Languages" are just the languages that IBM is promising to keep _compatible_ on all of the SAA "platforms." (Geez, I hate that psuedo-word.) Just because a language isn't supported by IBM as an SAA language doesn't mean you can't _use_ the language on an SAA system. In particular, I think it behooves IBM to come up with a standard set of Ada bindings to the various SAA subsystems (communications and database, especially) that WOULD be portable across the SAA platforms. After all, Ada is already totally portable, eh? :-) -- Jerry Callen ...!{uunet, gould, maybe others}!encore!jcallen jcallen@encore.encore.com Do what you want to with my signature, but leave my employer alone!
billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) (11/20/89)
From lee@sq.sq.com (Liam R. E. Quin): >> [...] "Ada and IBM... Capability and Committment" states: >> IBM is committed to Ada. Ada's support for modern software >> engineering concepts, its breadth of application, and its >> support for reuseable software components place it squarely >> in the forefront as a language of choice for both IBM's >> software engineers and for IBM's customers. > > No doubt the simple elegance of Ada appealed to IBM Actually, it's rather surprising, since their background has largely consisted of primitive languages which offer little or no support for the software engineering process. It's good to see IBM finally recognizing this major advance in software engineering technology. Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu
billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) (11/23/89)
From rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn):
> What has IBM got for Ada? How are they using it?
Compilers, a comprehensive Ada Programming Support Environment,
interfaces to IMS/VS, DB2, SAA, and SQL, an Ada equivalent of
CICS (called Ada Interactive Services), and so on. Further info
can be obtained from the IBM Ada Help Desk (1-800-387-0262).
IBM's Systems Integration Division is doing Ada projects in
its Colorado, Maryland, Texas, Virginia, and New York locations,
ranging from embedded and real-time systems to commercial systems.
Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edulee@sq.sq.com (Liam R. E. Quin) (11/26/89)
[I wrote] >> No doubt the simple elegance of Ada appealed to IBM [Bill Wolf wrote] > Actually, it's rather surprising, since their background has > largely consisted of primitive languages which offer little > or no support for the software engineering process. It's good > to see IBM finally recognizing this major advance in software > engineering technology. Uh, did I leave off the :-) signs? I was not being serious. Let's not start religious Ada vs. <whatever> quarrels. [mail me if you absolutely must, I'll try not to take EXCEPTION :-)]. Lee -- Liam R. Quin, Unixsys (UK) Ltd [note: not an employee of "sq" - a visitor!] lee@sq.com (Whilst visiting Canada from England, until Christmas) Software engineering is largely a philosophy, a state of mind.
kcr@netxdev.DHL.COM (Ken Ritchie) (11/26/89)
Recapping: IBM has elected to pursue Ada, surprising some folks(?) :-) C'mon folks... doesn't anybody KNOW about IBM? This had to be a MARKET DRIVEN decision, since IBM (by their own assertion) IS MARKET DRIVEN! The attractiveness of the smiling Countess ;-) (dear Ada) can be only a secondary persuasion. There's going to be a *BOOM* in Ada-based BUSINESS (i.e. $$) and IBM's obvious intention is to be right where the action is!! 8-) DISCLAIMER: I'm opinionated, who isn't? _______________________________________________________________________________ Ken Ritchie (d/b/a KCR) Usenet: ...!uunet!netxcom!netxdev!kcr c/o NetExpress Communications, Inc. FAX/office: USA (703) 749-2375