Re: ada-c++ productivity

[garys@cs.tamu.edu (Gary W Smith)]

My own personal experiences on the matter:

  =>
    I used to work for General Dynamics on F-16 avionics.  This was
    pre-Ada Jovial but I think the arguments apply to Ada as well.
    I (and 30 others) spent over a year on thinks such as a specifications
    document, requirements document, design document, building a prototype
    in Pascal, PDL, etc. before we even started thinking about coding
    in Jovial.  The actual coding took less than 2 months, followed
    by an extensive code review and test period.

    Some of these self-employed, academic people just don't understand
    the development process for defense projects.

  <=
    I do feel, however, that there is a certain amount of waste in the
    process.  For the most part, the defense dept./GD feel that 2167A is 
    a concrete rule that must be followed.  What I want to know is where
    has it been shown that a document-driven waterfall model is the *best*
    process to follow in the design of software.

    Another problem that I saw at GD was the amount of charging.
    The Air Force paid by the hour.  GD was under no pressure to keep
    the hours down and their basic solution to any problem was to
    hire more people.  I realize that a lot of this does not hold
    anymore with the recent layoffs at GD.  I was there during the
    Reagan buildups and when local boy Jim Wright was still big in
    the House.

- gary

--
"Eliminate the whole degree-and-grading system and 
     then you'll get real education."
Robert M. Pirsig - Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance