From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 109fba,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 115aec,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: f43e6,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid109fba,gid115aec,gidf43e6,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "Chad R. Meiners" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.realtime,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada) Date: 27 Mar 2005 11:41:25 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1111952485.639270.227910@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: <871xau9nlh.fsf@insalien.org> <3SjWd.103128$Vf.3969241@news000.worldonline.dk> <87r7iu85lf.fsf@insalien.org> <1110052142.832650@athnrd02> <1110284070.410136.205090@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <395uqaF5rhu2mU1@individual.net> <1111607633.301232.62490@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1111628011.160315.134740@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1111732101.995662.309040@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1111785256.454375.76600@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1369131.HYMxOlSdZt@linux1.krischik.com> <1111868963.494133.291150@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.167.137.13 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1111952490 13089 127.0.0.1 (27 Mar 2005 19:41:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:41:30 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: G2/0.2 Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=67.167.137.13; posting-account=paoWPg0AAABe-C1bfTlsEbfoc5yNqKFn Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10045 comp.lang.c++:47489 comp.realtime:1757 comp.software-eng:5383 Date: 2005-03-27T11:41:25-08:00 List-Id: Jerry Coffin wrote: > Second, this seems to assume that all the code is generated by SCADE, > and none written directly. This does NOT seem to be the case -- if you > look at page 6 of: >http://scilabsoft.inria.fr/events/05_11_03/ESTEREL.pdf >you'll see that they only claim 70% of the code was generated by SCADE. >Given the size of project we're talking about, the remaining 30% is a >_significant_ amount of code. It seems likely to me that if they were >using Ada for the hand-written code, they'd generate Ada as well. First, this nine slide sales pitch doesn't actually mention any language other than SCADE. Second, the 70% could have been the user interface, which communicated with a seperate subsystem that made up the bulk of the the remaining 30%. If a language like SCADE can't generate 95-99% of the code that it needs for a project, it isn't a very good formal tool. 30% is an aweful lot of room to invalidate any assurances that SCADE provided about the 70%. It would be my educated guess that SCADE was used in a subsystem which represented about 70% of the total code of the complete system. Anyway, when you deal with code generators size is deceptive. Generated code can be bloated very easily. As I mentioned previously, you are jumping to conclusions that are not supported by your evidence