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: 103376,456bbc1eb1b5c5bc,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ken Garlington Subject: "Density" of Ada 95 vs. Ada 83 Date: 1996/09/19 Message-ID: <32419F92.1E13@lmtas.lmco.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 184065413 content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K) Date: 1996-09-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: We are using the PRICE-S software cost estimating model for a project where we intend to use Ada 95. We input some source-lines-of-code size estimates based on existing Ada 83 work. PRICE-S generated cost estimates for the new project which were higher than we expected. Apparently, PRICE-S assumes that the average Ada 95 application will be "denser" than an Ada 83 application of equivalent functionality. That is, it should take fewer lines of Ada 95 code to express the same algorithms, data structures, etc. (on the average). Does anyone have some good quantitative information on whether Ada 95 is "denser" than Ada 83 for a given domain, and it so, how much "denser" on average? For that matter, does anyone have any qualitative analysis on this issue? We are trying to decide how we should handle the PRICE-S factors in our planning, so anything that would confirm or refute the PRICE-S view of Ada 95 would be appreciated. This information might be available on one of the web servers, but I haven't had time to do a search. Any pointers to such information would be appreciated. -- LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"