Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!gatech!bloom-beacon!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: "C" vrs ADA
Message-ID: <6321@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 22-Aug-87 14:22:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6321
Posted: Sat Aug 22 14:22:59 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Aug-87 11:14:49 EDT
References: <1065@vu-vlsi.UUCP> <12513@clyde.ATT.COM> <203@trwrc.UUCP> <12659@clyde.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Distribution: na
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 30

In article <12659@clyde.ATT.COM> spf@moss.UUCP (Steve Frysinger) writes:
>Anybody out there programming parallel processors in Ada?  Or C?

Yes, we use C for that.  Ada(tm) makes it hard to escape from its
default models, which we find unsuitable for our needs.  In
particular, its "rendezvous" mechanism is NOT what we need.
(I certainly don't want or need the ADAPSE either!)

Ada will "succeed" regardless of its technical merit, given that the
DOD is cramming it down programmers' throats.  C is succeeding also,
for different reasons.  COBOL, FORTRAN, BASIC, and LISP have all
been successful in various ways.  What does this prove?  Probably
nothing, other than that there is room for multiple languages.

I will say, however, that the day that a bureaucrat insists that I use
a particular programming language, when I'm in a position to assess
its suitability and he is not, I will quit working for the bureaucrat.
Unfortunately most programmers in the military-industrial complex do
not feel that they can or should maintain their professional integrity.

Ada's supposed product life-cycle economic advantages are spurious --
those advantages are primarily due to structured software development
methodology, which can be applied independent of choice of programming
language.  We're currently in the middle of a large structured
development project that happens to rely on C as its main
implementation language.  Changing to Ada would gain very little in
this area, and would be unwise for many other reasons.

Can we please quit discussing Ada in the C newsgroup?  There is an
Ada newsgroup, you know.