Re: GAO report on DoD mission-critical spending

[841613t@dragon.acadiau.ca (Don Tyzuk)]

Greg:

I don't find the abstract at all enlightening.  The GAO
recognizes that there " are no easy solutions ".

Choice of an implementation language is only one step in
the process of fixing the software crisis.  We also need
to learn a lot more about how to build systems.

I believe that software re-use can save the poor taxpayer
a lot of money, but we haven't yet figured out exactly how
to build software components that are "very re-usable".

I recently read an interview with a senior (maybe the chief)
software developer at Bell-Northern Research, in Ottawa. He
stated the the use of C++ has resulted in a huge libray of
objects created by various programmers on various projects.

His problem, he explained was what to do with them all?

They are activley working on cataloging, building browsers,
etc.  Unfortunatley, they have more objects than they can
use at the moment, thank-you-very-much.

So, as I agree with the general threads that the various 
governmental agencies and contractors are dragging their 
feet, the future is still to be determined as to the
eventual winner.... 

I for one, like Ada because it is very readable, even if
the author has not paid the greatest attention to readability.
I equally dislike C and C++ for it's terseness, however 
the concession is made that the C code of the Xinu OS is 
among the most readable code of ANY language I have read.
-- 
Don Tyzuk				| P.O. Box 1406
Jodrey School of Computer Science	| Wolfville, Nova Scotia
Acadia University			| CANADA     B0P 1X0
e-mail: don.tyzuk@acadiau.ca