Re: Choosing C++ instead of Ada

["Stanley R. Allen" <s_allen@hso.link.com>]

Richard Riehle wrote:
> 
> I am meeting more and more DoD managers and contractors who, at the
> management level, are concerned with whether Ada has the staying
> power required for them to select it for important projects. While
> many of them agree that Ada is probably superior to C++, that superiority
> may prove to be of marginal value when weighed against the availability
> of tools for C++, programmers in C++, and the myriad of other resources
> for C++.
> 
> These managers are asking whether Ada will be around for the next ten
> years, and if it is, whether there will be cost-effective tools and
> compilers to make Ada a good business decision.  They are convinced that
> C++ will not go away.

Yes, it's a pitiful shame that these ideas whirl through such
influential minds.  DoD managers and contractors need to
understand the the trend is away from C++ in the commercial
realm; something that seems implied in a lot of public
statements by the commercial development community these
days.

For example, the latest issue of Windows Tech Journal (Nov 96)
has an editorial that reports the results of a private
conference involving high-level representativies from
big commercial vendors (Microsoft included); C++ is
described as a dead issue; "it's like leaded gas, you'll
still be able to get it, but it won't be the main thing";
its role will be limited to the back end of the process
(the output of a RAD tool, for example).  Essentially,
they seem to be saying that C++ will be more of an
assembly language, at least for Windows development.

The editor goes on to say that he doesn't mourn the 
passing of C++, after all, "there's something seriously
wrong with a language that spawns a sub-industry in
pointer-debugging tools and object-code checkers"
(not an exact quote).

These sentiments seem to be echoed in almost every journal
I read (especially the "letters" sections) -- programmers are
fed up with C++, and generally only endure it if the code is
generated for them in some way.  They aren't programming "in"
C++ so much as they are programming in the "applications
framework".  And there aren't many of these frameworks for
non-GUI-based projects.

No wonder there is such a mad rush to Java -- even though
Java has yet to prove itself in one major application.
Overnight a whole industry has grown up around this new
language, and millions of dollars are being bet on its
success.  And I believe that at least half of the reason
for its popularity is that developers have been looking
for a way out of the C++ trap. (The other half would be
JVM support in commercial web browsers).

If Java wins the commercial development language war,
which looks very possible, and the DoD decided to go
with C++ because of all of the commercial support you
mention, then the DoD will be the big loser because in
a few years all that commercial support will disappear.

> And they believe that C++, with all of its
> liabilities, will continue to get better.
> This is a powerful argument.

Except, of course, that every time C++ gets better,
it gets worse!  ;)

> 
> One senior executive at a DoD contracting site asked me to name three
> Ada compiler vendors. It was easy to name three, but I realized that
> the field has narrowed.  Now name three software companies who provide
> testing tools for Ada.  What about three providers of configuration
> management tools?  What about other third-party tools?

But you should ask them how many C++ vendors there are.
I can think of three -- Microsoft, Borland, and Symantec.
Now think of ten; not so easy.  I know it's easier to
think of ten test vendors for C++ products -- C++ programs
need more tests!!

So, is C++ really that popular, or is it just backed by
heavy muscle?  And if that backing diminishes, whence
goes C++?  My programmer friends over the commercial
wall say that Microsoft is really more committed to
Visual Basic -- all the hot new stuff is introduced there
first, later migrates to C++.  I'm sure Borland feels
that way about Delphi -- proprietary technology will
lock developers in to vendor-specific languages and tools.
So, C++ will play second fiddle to VB and Delphi.  And
the same thing will happen to Java as well, witness
Microsoft J++.

Ask the DoD contracting manager if she wants the missile
system developed in Visual Basic -- after all, the newest,
neatest, and largest collection of tools are only available
for that platform.


Stanley Allen (speaking for myself)
s_allen@hso.link.com
-- Proposal for CORBA 3.0: The Acronym Repository