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: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: Michael Stark Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/02/06 Message-ID: <36BC74B9.5A8@cs.umd.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 441398279 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <77ledn$eu7$1@remarQ.com> <77pnqc$cgi$1@newnews.global.net.uk> <8p64spq5lo5.fsf@Eng.Sun.COM> <77t3ld$nou$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79ce4s$lfq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79chc7$ko6@drn.newsguy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@cs.umd.edu X-Trace: cronkite.cs.umd.edu 918320313 21683 128.8.126.43 (6 Feb 1999 16:58:33 GMT) Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742 Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 Feb 1999 16:58:33 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java Date: 1999-02-06T16:58:33+00:00 List-Id: Stephen Leake wrote: > > mike writes: > > > In article <79ce4s$lfq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, mll@xmission.com says... > > > > > Even places like NASA now have moved from Ada to C++. I think this is > > a sign of C++ maturity now, and not a sign that Ada is a bad language. > > (Speaking as a NASA employee) > > NASA is a big place, and almost never speaks with one mind, especially > on an issue like this. We have programmers that prefer Fortran, > assembler, C, C++, and Ada, to name only a few of the languages I've > run into here. I like to think that those of us who prefer Ada are > more productive (I know I am), but I have no real data on this, and > NASA has no overall policy of measuring such things (although we are > starting the process of becoming ISO 9001 compliant, so there's hope). > > So please be more careful about making such sweeping statements. > > -- Stephen Leake, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Stephe is correct that one shouldn't make sweeping generalizations about NASA (or any other large org, for that matter). However, it is unfortunately correct that the organization that did extensive measurement on Ada projects and saw positive results (The Software Engineering Lab at Goddard measuring software in the Flight Dynamics Division) did decide to go C++. More accurately, it was one branch head that made the decision. He consulted the directors of the SEL on what they thought the future held, but did not consult with technical people advocating Ada (like me) and I presume the same held for the C++ zealots. I think he thought that neither group of zealots would add anything new to the decision making process. The drawback was that he had some misconceptions (severe underestimates) on how much it would cost to convert existing Ada software to C++. The proper approach, in the spirit of the SEL's paradigm of understanding the current environment, assessing new technologies, and feeding improvements back into the development organization; would have been to run a C++ project as an experiment and compare the metrics with the Ada baseline, then to make a decision. Instead, the approach was to guess at the future, which at the time did not have an inkling of Java coming over the horizon. I have maintained that if we had completed a conversion to C++ it would have finished in time to start the conversion to Java ;) Ironically enough, most of the systems in this area are now implemented in MATLAB, as requirements have scaled back to fit smaller budgets, and the MATLAB GUI library became as good or better than the GUI we were using (a home-grown C system). Our users also liked having the interpretive environment with the extensive math library to allow them to play with algorithms more easily. So I guess all us language zealots ultimately got our comeuppance ;) BTW, the lack of end-user input into how we developed reusable software is motivating my selection of dissertation topic. It will focus on reuse from the customer perspective. since I'm real early in proposal writing, I don't have a concrete plan yet. Mike -- Michael Stark Goddard Research & Study Fellow University of Maryland, College Park e-mail: mstark@cs.umd.edu phone: (301) 405-2721 "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" -- Martin Luther King, Letter From Birmingham City Jail