Re: Why ADA?

[rochester!kodak!ispd-newsserver!psinntp!vitro.com!v7.vitro.com!eswgcc@rut gers.edu (Carmen Castells-Schofield)]

In article <1992Mar25.163726.10669@mahendo.jpl.nasa.gov>, felipe@larissa.jpl.na
sa.gov (Felipe Hervias) writes:
> In article <1992Mar24.161425.125@v7.vitro.com>, carmencs@vitro.com (Carmen Ca
stells-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 wr
ites:
> |> > 
> |> >>	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 coul
dn'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 fi
rst 
> |> 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 run
ning 
> |> 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 lea
rn 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.
>    

	This is true if and only if you always use good software engineering
techniques, no matter the time pressure, and so does everyone you ever work 
with and/or have to support old code from.   Historically, however, this has 
not proven true.   Therefore, a language like Ada which makes it easy to do 
good design and harder to kludge stuff, and which forces you to think things 
through up front, has a place in the software engineering community.   You can 
write good, structured assembler, too, but very little existing assembler is...

> 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.

	I agree that the average hacker would probably rather write C/C++.   I 
maintain, however, that the average software engineer would rather MAINTAIN 
Ada.
         ______________________________________________________________________
        /  Carmen Castells-Schofield             Internet: carmencs@vitro.com
__     /   Vitro Corporation	                 Voice:    (301) 231-2187
  \   /    14000 Georgia Ave.              ....................................
   \ /     Silver Spring, MD 20906-2972    : May the light within us all    
    *                                      : answer each the other's call
                                           :...................................
*******************************************************************************
*   Any opinions expressed herein are my own property, not those of whoever   *
*            happens to be holding my paycheck at the moment.                 *
*******************************************************************************