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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,411186037d1bc912
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Matthew M. Lih" <matt.lih@trw.com>
Subject: Re: Some questions about Ada.
Date: 1996/05/06
Message-ID: <318E4BB5.2BE2@trw.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 153713374
references: <DqrD2C.Jyr@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> <3188F63D.3325@io.com>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: TRW Enterprise Solutions
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.01Gold (WinNT; I)
Date: 1996-05-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Dave Jones wrote:

> My opinion:  Ada95 is the best all-around language for software engineering.
> C++ is awful.  Nevertheless, if I were starting a project today, I would
> probably choose to use C++.  Why?:  More (and better and cheaper) tools are
> available for C++, more programmers are trained to program in C++, et cetera.

Your statement perplexes me. If Ada95 is the best language, I would hope
that means it's more "cost-effective" than other languages. (Use C++
for argument's sake.) But your statement effectively says this is outweighed
by the tool factor and training factor, and other minor issues. I could
argue against this, but I guess my question is really "How good does
Ada have to be to outweigh the popularity of C++?"


Matthew M. Lih
Software Lead, SAIN Project
TRW Enterprise Solutions