Re: Why ADA?

[elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!mahendo!larissa!felipe@decwrl.dec.com (Felipe Hervias]

In article <1992Mar24.161425.125@v7.vitro.com>, carmencs@vitro.com (Carmen Cast
ells-Schofield) writes:
|> In article <13235@suns3.crosfield.co.uk>, pdg@crosfield.co.uk (paul goffin) 
writes:
|> > In article <1992Mar21.235624.1@jaguar.uofs.edu> das11@jaguar.uofs.edu writ
es:
|> > 
|> >>	at my university, they stress ada development.  why should i
|> >>	program in ada when there is c?  what does ada offer me?  please,
|> >>	do not give me the crap that c is a glorified assembler.
|> > 
|> >>	if i program with good oo style, what does ada buy me that i
|> >>	can not do in c?
|> > 
|> >>	dave.
|> > 
|> > 
|> > The real point, and this is something you may meet later in your working
|> > life, is that if you need to get something done that requires MORE THAN
|> > ONE PERSON, you need to make the 'right' way the 'easy' way.
|> > 
|> > With a good 'C' compiler, a good linker, a very good 'lint' (try
|> > Gimble 'Flexelint' BTW) and GOOD PROJECT MANAGEMENT, you _can_ achieve
|> > pretty robust 'C'.  But, the first time something is needed 'in a hurry'
|> > the temptation to take the easy way and, say, ignore 'lint' comes in.
|> > 
|> > With Ada, 'lint' and good scope controls are 'built-in'.  It is
|> > actually _harder_ to get bad Ada to compile than good Ada, so, as
|> > we're all pretty lazy really, we do the eazy thing and write good
|> > Ada.
|> > 
|> > Yes, one can write good 'C', but under pressure to get it done fast,
|> > most people don't.
|> > 
|> > Paul.
|> 
|> This was a very nice exposition of a sentiment I wanted to convey and couldn
't
|> think of how to put.   Just to extend this a little, I would say that Ada 
|> forces you to use these concepts; C just lets you.   The difference the firs
t 
|> time you use Ada in a group is amazing; we spent 1 week doing joint design, 
|> three weeks separately doing development, and then were integrated and runni
ng 
|> in about an hour.   This with good software engineers who were doing their 
|> first Ada project.
|> 
|> The big payback for Ada is for team development.   That's not what you learn
 in 
|> school, but it is what you'll need in the real world.
|> 
|> -- 

By learning Ada in school doesn't prepare someone for the 'real world.'
You don't need and shouldn't have to use Ada to learn good software 
development. If you have a good software engineering background the
so call benefits of Ada doesn't show.
   
I have used Ada and C is the past and I can see why Ada will never be as
popular as C or ever come close. The increasing popularity of C++ will
only make C/C++ even more popular.

With all the defense cuts (the driving engine of Ada) will cause the 
language (Ada) to shift to a lower gear and maybe it will even stall...


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Felipe Hervias                             ****  *******    ****
Jet Propulsion Laboratory                  ****  ****  ***  ****
M/S T-1704                                 ****  ****  ***  ****
4800 Oak Grove Drive                  ***  ****  *******    ****
Pasadena, CA 91109                    ***  ****  ****       ********
email : felipe@triton.jpl.nasa.gov      ******   ****       ********
voice : (818) 354-0582                >>> Where the future begins <<<
fax   : (818) 393-4089
---------------------------------------------------------------------