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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1b24a190fcdd842e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: vonhend@ibm.net Subject: Re: C/C++ cheaper than Ada?? how? Date: 1998/07/08 Message-ID: <35a398f2.0@news1.ibm.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 369577192 References: <6nubua$ocj@drn.newsguy.com> X-Notice: should be reported to postmaster@ibm.net X-Complaints-To: postmaster@ibm.net X-Trace: 8 Jul 1998 16:06:10 GMT, 166.72.214.22 Organization: IBM.NET Reply-To: vonhend@ibm.net Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-07-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In <6nubua$ocj@drn.newsguy.com>, nabbasi@earthlink.net writes: > >what do you think they mean by saying C/C++ is "cheaper" than Ada? in >what sense? if they measure the time one spends fixing C/C++ bugs that >an Ada compile finds at compile time, they'll find Ada much cheaper. > Generally, when they say C/C++ is "cheaper" than Ada, the DoD is considering only 2 factors: the cost of licenses for the compilers, and the cost of software engineers/programmers with sufficient skill with (read "knowledge of" for "skill with") the language. In general, on the kinds of computer systems in wide use by DoD (VAX, Sun SPARCs, HPs, IBMs--but not PCs) Ada compilers require _expensive_ licenses. On the other hand, a C and/or C++ compiler is often bundled (for no extra charge) with the operating system. As for programmers, the colleges, universities, and trade schools are turning out C++ programmers by the thousands. Ada programmers are comparatively rare. In this country (USA), many hiring managers have the erroneous impression that Ada is unsuited to business programming, but C++ is excellent for it. As a result, the educational centers are pushed toward ... well, just look in the newspaper at the classified section. It is emphatically not cheaper to build a sizeable application (anything over 100,000 lines of code) in C++. Even if you take fresh from college C programmers, train them in Ada programming and the use of Ada-specific software development tools, buy new hardware and software, and do all the documentation required by MIL-STD 2167A, it still costs much less to develop the program in C++. The above statement is based not only on my experience (nearly 20 years in major aerospace corporations) but on those of colleagues who have managed a variety of large and small software projects for said aerospace corporations. Mark Von Hendy, Sr. Scientific Programmer/Analyst Lockheed Martin Technical Operations >interesting in that they say "cheaper" then follow that by "engineering >approach". > >Nasser > >-- >GOVERNMENT NEWS > >GCN June 22, 1998 > >http://www.acm.org/archives/wa.cgi?A1=ind9806&L=team-ada#5 > >"Defense is increasingly turning to cheaper programming languages >such as C and C++ to program its systems. DOD is >encouraging systems programmers to use an engineering approach >when selecting a software language, based on a number >of factors including lifecycle costs, risks and interoperability. > >"DOD policy now places all programming languages on equal footing, where >capability to provide the best support to the >mission requirement will drive the solution selected, not a one-size-fits-all >mandate," Valletta said. "