From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 14 Aug 91 14:41:29 GMT From: uvaarpa!software.org!stluka@mcnc.org (Fred Stluka) Subject: Re: c++ vs ada results Message-ID: <1991Aug14.144129.6334@software.org> List-Id: In article <1991Aug13.142900.28910@slcs.slb.com> cornish@slcs.slb.com (Darryl C ornish) writes: > Grady Booch converted the Booch Ada Component Library from ADA to C++. > The result was thaty 150,000 lines of ADA became 20,000 lines of C++. > > While smaller is not necessarily better, this does give one cause to > wonder at the logic of people (e.g., the DOD) who make decisions on > the fact that ADA programmers produced 30% more lines of code / month > than C++ programmers. This comparison requires some context. The Booch parts are a small collection of FAMILIES of related parts. That is, there are dozens of variations on the implementation of a stack, dozens of queues, etc. This is exactly the kind of code which can benefit MOST by inheritance (one of C++'s admitted strengths over Ada). It would be hard to contrive a 150,000 line example which was less suited to Ada and more suited to C++. Based on the huge amount of duplication in the Booch parts, I am surprised that the reduction was only a factor of 7.5. It is unreasonable to extrapolate from this single figure when discussing complete software systems. --Fred -- Fred Stluka Internet: stluka@software.org Software Productivity Consortium UUNet: ...!uunet!software!stluka 2214 Rock Hill Rd, Herndon VA 22070 USA Voice: (703)742-7236