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: f849b,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf849b,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 101b33,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid101b33,public X-Google-Thread: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 115aec,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: Marin David Condic Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/01/14 Message-ID: <369E0EA2.1AFB1C1E@pwfl.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 432567547 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: condicma@bogon.pwfl.com References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369CAB38.404C0610@praxis-cs.co.uk> <369CBD49.C686157D@pwfl.com> <369DECA9.44959773@enea.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Pratt & Whitney Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: diespammer@pwfl.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.vxworks,comp.lang.java,comp.java.advocacy,comp.realtime,comp.arch.embedded,comp.object,comp.lang.java.programmer Date: 1999-01-14T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Obviously a valid point. Remember though that the original post was about a system that was expected to be long lived - in which case, portability, reuse, long term support, etc. are all real concerns that should be addressed. I hear that the way Micro$oft develops software is to hack it together in C as quickly as possible to get it to market early. When its time to produce version N+1, they basically throw out the existing stuff and start over again. In that mode, there is very little, if anything, that resembles "maintenance". They make throw-away code and they do it in C. Now here's a question: Just because you are making throw-away code, is there some reason that you *can't* do that in Ada? You don't need the advantages of maintainability or reusability, but maybe you could take advantage of the reliability, etc. which might mean your apps would ship with fewer bugs. Granted, you may never intend to fix the bugs, but it would seem that software with a reputation for fewer bugs ought to have a competitive edge over less reliable products. I know of no reason why applications developed in C cannot be done equally as well or better in Ada. I do not find C to be somehow inherently "faster" in development time. If anything, I find it slower. And even when I've got development of throw-away code going on, I've found that development gets significantly leveraged by the presence of lots of Ada utility packages we've got lying around here which would be difficult to duplicate in C. I've got metrics that have demonstrated faster development time for Ada vs C and I know that there have been a number of studies in both acedemia and industry which back that claim up. MDC Ola Liljedahl wrote: > > For some products/projects it is not meaningful to try to re-use ten > year old code. Technologies (hardware and software) changes. > Requirements changes. To utilize the most of the available hardware > you need to redesign your system and rewrite your code. If you are > not leading edge somebody else will be. Some other company with the > best brains and the proper tools making it possible to churn out the > best and most interesting software while your product boasts that it > is still using that first list package you ever wrote. Everything dies. > -- Marin David Condic Real Time & Embedded Systems, Propulsion Systems Analysis United Technologies, Pratt & Whitney, Large Military Engines M/S 731-95, P.O.B. 109600, West Palm Beach, FL, 33410-9600 Ph: 561.796.8997 Fx: 561.796.4669 ***To reply, remove "bogon" from the domain name.*** "Nobody shot me." -- Last words of Frank Gusenberg when asked by police who shot him fourteen times with a machine gun in the Saint Valentine's Day Massacre.