ted@grebyn.com (Ted Holden) (03/25/90)
A few final comments here (a real diatribe = 100+ lines...) From: Bill Wolfe, Clemson >>From ted@grebyn.com (Ted Holden): >> [alleged problem with Ada:] >> o Major project many months behind schedule (e.g. >> STASNFINS, space telescope, WISS etc.) > That's interesting, Ted... according to the Proceedings of the > Eighth Annual National Conference on Ada Technology (p. 140), > STANFINS-R was completed on time and within budget, and it was > observed that the Ada code ran significantly faster than its COBOL > counterpart. This is despite the fact that STANFINS-R had to take > raw COBOL programmers and train them to be Ada Software Engineers, > despite the fact that a CICS binding did not exist when the project > began (and therefore had to be created during the project), and despite > the fact that a Datacom/DB interface also had to be forced into existence. > Not only was the Army's Information Systems Software Development Center > tremendously pleased with the results, the Air Force has just announced > its decision to use STANFINS-R as its financial software system as well. > Any other flat-out lies you'd like to spread? > Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu In the current (March 19) issue of Government Computer News, page 62, we read that the SAT for STANFINS is now scheduled for May of this year. Actually, that's a reschedule, and probably one of several. Major General Alonzo E. Short is quoted in the article as follows: "We are going to have to spawn something in Ada - a system that has been planned, developed, and placed on the street in such a way that someone can say, 'Ada is solving my problem'. Because such a system has not been delivered yet, a fair assessment is that the jury is still out on whether Ada can be used efficiently in a large information system. Many of us are standing on the sidelines awaiting the outcome to see how Ada works for a large MIS. If we don't start sharing the good news, we will soon have to start sharing the bad news..." Come on Wolfie, make my day: call General Short a liar. ................................................................ Dirty Laundry = fix a few things, old code recompiles with five minutes of work on new compilers (add function profiles to old C programs) Up Shit Creek = any of the real fixes needed would break the language; two versions of Ada maintained for all times afterwards (as if one version wasn't bad enough). ................................................................. True Meaning of the term 'FIVE Year Plan': >From: Robert I. Eachus, Mitre >The same thing seems to be happening on Ada 9X. There is a >groundswell developing to fix a few small things NOW, and leave the >rest til later. >It will probably take five years to get a good proposal >together. I also think that that is a minimum time to study some of >these issues and come up with something that mixes cleanly with the >existing language... Translation into plain English: "By that time, I'll be living in another town, doing something else for a living, maybe even using a different name, yeah... and some other poor sucker can deal with THIS bullshit..." Ted Holden HTE