Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!decwrl!glacier!kestrel!ladkin
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Newsgroups: net.lang,net.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Integer division: a winner declared
Message-ID: <5030@kestrel.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 20-Feb-86 23:12:58 EST
Article-I.D.: kestrel.5030
Posted: Thu Feb 20 23:12:58 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Feb-86 06:19:00 EST
References: <11610@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <5100003@ccvaxa> <548@ism780c.UUCP> <11923@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: Kestrel Institute, Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 19
Keywords: Ada and DoD
Xref: linus net.lang:1924 net.lang.ada:649

In article <11923@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, weemba@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU 
(Matthew P. Wiener) writes:
> You may be interested that many of the largest defense companies/contractors
> consider Ada to be a complete joke and have no intention of making it 
> available
> unless their programmers start screaming and begging for it.  This includes
> Los Alamos National Labs, Lawrence Livermore Labs, 
> the National Security Agency,
> NASA and Lockheed.

Considering ADA to be flawed - not in one of your cases.
Having no intention of making it available, again false in two of
your quoted list.
From first hand knowledge.

There is enormous pressure to write in ADA for DOD work.
DOE? No idea.

Peter Ladkin