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: 103376,63ceef1cf4561e32 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Scott Ingram` Subject: Re: Customer balks at Ada -- any hope? Date: 2000/07/18 Message-ID: <3974EE3D.1F8E016E@silver.jhuapl.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 647999042 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <8l01s4$gnr$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3974A1D5.1F9AA2E5@Raytheon.com> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: usenet@houston.jhuapl.edu X-Trace: houston.jhuapl.edu 963964573 26193 128.244.10.34 (18 Jul 2000 23:56:13 GMT) Organization: Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Jul 2000 23:56:13 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-07-18T23:56:13+00:00 List-Id: 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.)