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,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: Mike Stark Subject: Re: Ada is 'better' than C because... Date: 1996/08/15 Message-ID: <32132560.E77@gsfc.nasa.gov>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 174536618 references: <01bb7bf9$b89a1740$96ee6fcf@timhome2> <4tj43k$16r@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3205F296.41C6@wgs.estec.esa.nl> <320729F1.1ADC@lmtas.lmco.com> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c x-mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Macintosh; I; 68K) Date: 1996-08-15T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Folks -- I strongly recommend this report (see URL below), because it is the closest thing you will ever see to a controlled experiment. This is because the Rational (formerly Verdix) VADS product is a mix of C and Ada, with the same development team working in both languages (because enhancement/ correction assignments were handed out for product features, not for individual modules. It's been a while since I've read it, but I believe only one relatively new employee hadn't worked in both languages. The conclusion was that Ada modules cost less and had lower error rates. Again, read the report and you will see that there is strong evidence backing up this conclusion, at least for the type of product and marketing environment compiler vendors live in. URL for "Comparing Development Costs of C and Ada": http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/docs/reports/cada/cada_art.html Mike