* Assistance needed @ 1998-07-27 0:00 Chris Sparks (aka Mr. Ada) 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Robert B. Love 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Chris Sparks (aka Mr. Ada) @ 1998-07-27 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi fellow Ada-philes, I need some ammunition against using C++. There has been some talk here at work that some of the future add-on work may be using C++. The software in question is safety-critical and I wanted to quote "BAD" examples of C++ usage on projects. Examples I have seen are: Navy plight with Windows NT Colorado Airport baggage snafu URLs will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Chris Sparks http://www.catalina-inter.net/mrada ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Assistance needed 1998-07-27 0:00 Assistance needed Chris Sparks (aka Mr. Ada) @ 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Robert B. Love 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Travis C. Porco 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Robert B. Love @ 1998-07-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In <35BCF867.E7EA0EF0@catalina-inter.net> "Chris Sparks (aka Mr. Ada)" wrote: > to quote "BAD" examples of C++ usage on projects. > > Examples I have seen are: > Navy plight with Windows NT > Colorado Airport baggage snafu If memory serves, the language used in the Denver baggage system had nothing to do with the problem. The system was poorly designed, it ran open loop and used timing to know when bags were in a certain area, not a sensor. As much as I'm pro Ada I can't see blaming the choice of C++. Double check this. Of course you could say anyone silly enough to try this open loop strategy would be silly enough to use C++ but I wouldn't go that far. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Love MIME & NeXT Mail OK rlove@neosoft.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Assistance needed 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Robert B. Love @ 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Travis C. Porco 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Travis C. Porco 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Travis C. Porco @ 1998-07-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <6pm0aq$8bu$1@uuneo.neosoft.com>, Robert B. Love <rlove@antispam.neosoft.com> wrote: >In <35BCF867.E7EA0EF0@catalina-inter.net> "Chris Sparks (aka Mr. Ada)" >wrote: >> to quote "BAD" examples of C++ usage on projects. >> Examples I have seen are: >> Navy plight with Windows NT >> Colorado Airport baggage snafu >If memory serves, the language used in the Denver baggage system had >nothing to do with the problem. The system was poorly designed, it >ran open loop and used timing to know when bags were in a certain area, >not a sensor. As much as I'm pro Ada I can't see blaming the choice >of C++. Double check this. >Of course you could say anyone silly enough to try this open loop >strategy would be silly enough to use C++ but I wouldn't go that >far. Aside from the Joyner paper, which I'm sure you've seen, I don't know of much. There is very little good data on programming languages, and a lot of hot air (computing is very emotional). I only do small time one-person stuff, where programmer time is at a premium, and I learned a long time ago that (1) programming is extremely demanding, and (2) anything that lightens the load is a big help. So I won't do imperative programming in anything other than Ada; the attention to readability and "human factors" in general in the language design is a Good Thing! (We need _a priori_ reasons for language choice, since there is no good data; to me, one significant fact about Ada is the fact that human factors played a conscious role in the design.) When Ada83 first came out, a lot of hackers rejected it because of its complexity, and association with the military (the notion of "private" types was particularly offensive to some people). But a few years later, after straining at this gnat, they swallowed a camel: C--. I made a real effort to learn C++, spending all together several months, and it's just too difficult to bother with; the juice isn't worth the squeeze. That's just one person's self-selected testimonial, so it's not worth diddly-squat as data, but there you have it. -- Travis **standard disclaimers apply** "The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools." --Herbert Spencer ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Assistance needed 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Travis C. Porco @ 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Travis C. Porco 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Travis C. Porco @ 1998-07-29 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) I apologize for this "language war" post; I have lurked here for years, learning things, but usually abort this sort of post before sending it; this time I hit send instead of abort. Oh well, I meant every word of it. In article <6pmanb$6qu$1@agate.berkeley.edu>, Travis C. Porco <porco@stat.Berkeley.EDU> wrote: >In article <6pm0aq$8bu$1@uuneo.neosoft.com>, >Robert B. Love <rlove@antispam.neosoft.com> wrote: >>In <35BCF867.E7EA0EF0@catalina-inter.net> "Chris Sparks (aka Mr. Ada)" >>wrote: >>> to quote "BAD" examples of C++ usage on projects. >>> Examples I have seen are: >>> Navy plight with Windows NT >>> Colorado Airport baggage snafu >>If memory serves, the language used in the Denver baggage system had >>nothing to do with the problem. The system was poorly designed, it >>ran open loop and used timing to know when bags were in a certain area, >>not a sensor. As much as I'm pro Ada I can't see blaming the choice >>of C++. Double check this. > >>Of course you could say anyone silly enough to try this open loop >>strategy would be silly enough to use C++ but I wouldn't go that >>far. > >Aside from the Joyner paper, which I'm sure you've seen, I don't know >of much. There is very little good data on programming languages, >and a lot of hot air (computing is very emotional). I only do small >time one-person stuff, where programmer time is at a premium, and I >learned a long time ago that (1) programming is extremely demanding, >and (2) anything that lightens the load is a big help. > >So I won't >do imperative programming in anything other than Ada; the attention >to readability and "human factors" in general in the language design >is a Good Thing! (We need _a priori_ reasons for language choice, >since there is no good data; to me, one significant fact about Ada >is the fact that human factors played a conscious role in the design.) > >When Ada83 first came out, a lot of hackers rejected it because of >its complexity, and association with the military (the notion of >"private" types was particularly offensive to some people). But a few >years later, after straining at this gnat, they swallowed a camel: >C--. I made a real effort to learn C++, spending all together several >months, and it's just too difficult to bother with; the juice isn't >worth the squeeze. That's just one person's self-selected testimonial, >so it's not worth diddly-squat as data, but there you have it. > >-- >Travis **standard disclaimers apply** > >"The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly >is to fill the world with fools." --Herbert Spencer -- Travis **standard disclaimers apply** "The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools." --Herbert Spencer ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1998-07-29 0:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 1998-07-27 0:00 Assistance needed Chris Sparks (aka Mr. Ada) 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Robert B. Love 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Travis C. Porco 1998-07-29 0:00 ` Travis C. Porco
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox