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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!bu.edu!encore!jcallen
From: jcallen@Encore.COM (Jerry Callen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Reserve Demobilization System Built Around Reused Ada Code
Message-ID: <15075@encore.Encore.COM>
Date: 4 Jun 91 14:59:29 GMT
References: <0D010010.gk4ndi@brain.UUCP>
Reply-To: jcallen@encore.Com (Jerry Callen)
Organization: Encore Computer Corp, Marlboro, MA
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> [In several articles, Jim Showalter and Chuck Shotton debate whether 
>  a recent Ada success should be called "enhancement and maintenance"
>  or "reuse."]

I don't suppose anyone associated with the project is reading this
news group, are they? Don't be shy! :-)

I find it quite easy to believe that some 800K SLOC of Ada could be
"reused" as is; I have a LOT of packages that I reuse all the time,
and I can believe that a large system might be, say, 80% existing
utilities (database management, windowing package, etc.) and 20% glue.

On the other hand, I can also picture "enhancing" a large portion of not
necessarily directly reusable code, making many changes in many places.
Ada makes THAT relatively easy, too.

SO - unless someone on the project can comment, let's admit that we're
all guessing, shall we? :-)

-- Jerry Callen
   jcallen@encore.com