Re: Customer balks at Ada -- any hope?

[Scott Ingram` <scott@silver.jhuapl.edu>]

Ken,

Methinks that the spillover from the comp.lang.eiffel thread has
soured your milk this month.  To take your points in order:

Ken Garlington wrote:

> Are you sure that buying/maintaining/getting training for an Ada and a C
> compiler is cheaper than just using a C compiler?

o  My perception is that anyone who can write Ada, can write
in any language at the same level.  Its just a matter of having a
book at hand.  That goes for 3 & 4 GLs, naked SQL, Java, and
c++ (though I typically punt and revert to C if I am that desperate.)
I apologize for having specifications and bodies in my C code, but
it works for me.

As a GNATnik (thank you Tucker, for that wonderful term-I had
not heard it before!) I know far more about my compiler than I
would expect the average developer to know.  However, the knowledge
I would expect a developer to know isn't much.  Which switches
are to be used for a particular project is something that I would presume
to be established by edict from a "higher level."

In other words, I don't see any performance or cost penalty in
having an Ada savvy workforce.

> Are you sure that, if there's a C compiler that runs on the FWW (Future
> Wonderful Workstation) host, there will be an Ada compiler that runs on the
> FWW host?

o As far as FWWs go, there is always GNAT.  And anywhere Linux
goes, so will GNAT.  That may not cover ALL platforms, but I currently
use GNAT to do maintenance on an Ada83 16bit platform that is not
supported either by GNAT or GCC.  Its not the future that worries me,
its the past.  A countercase could be made for specialized platforms like
DSPs, the TI chips supported by DDCI being a prime example.  Will
there be economical support for them?  I believe so.  There are too
many GNATniks around.

> Are you sure that there are as many vendors for Ada-to-C "translators" as
> there are C vendors?

o  The quantity of Ada-to-C compilers is a red herring.   AFIK, there is
only one.  If I should begin a project that depends on that product and
Tucker dies (G-d forbid, I use this as an example only) I can still deliver
by taking the generated code base in C and continuing on.  My maintenance
costs will be higher, but if I haven't Ada to fall back on; who cares?

> Are you sure that any translation issues will be fixed immediately by the
> Ada vendor at no charge?

o  Ahhh, now there's a rub.  This goes directly to the heart of tort law,
a subject that is raised here in c.l.a more than any other newsgroup I've
ever seen.  (I don't frequent groups where that would be the subject of
interest.)  Obviously this is a point that must be negotiated, preferably
prior to involvement by either party.  This is outside the realm of Ada
or its viability and indeed is in a domain shared by all software products.
We now move to the "warranty" domain, can you warrant that C will
be around in 25 years?  It seems likely (although I personally detest it
as a dirty little language that shouldn't be allowed to live--I would rather
write assembly.)