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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,971aa11c293c3db1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-18 20:42:42 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail
From: Larry Hazel <lhazel@mindspring.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada The Best Language?
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 22:37:20 -0500
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Message-ID: <3B5655F0.3442DBF1@mindspring.com>
References: <3B59EE1C@MailAndNews.com>
 <5be89e2f.0107180606.7185b1cb@posting.google.com>
 <3B559E79.F21DBE5C@earthlink.net>
 <5be89e2f.0107181231.40bde882@posting.google.com>
 <3B55FFD5.9927BD6@san.rr.com> <9j50m7$ee3$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: c7.ae.9c.c7
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Server-Date: 19 Jul 2001 03:42:01 GMT
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,x-ns11F8K63r3NhQ,x-ns2r2e09OnmPe2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10224
Date: 2001-07-19T03:42:01+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Marin David Condic wrote:
> 
> There is one other thing to bring up along these lines. Are there any
> studies with hard data that C++ shows a productivity increase over
> programming in C? The point is, the industry just simply doesn't do this
> kind of study. If someone had such a study of C++ vs C, we could sit here
> for months arguing over all the relevant factors and trying to decide if the
> syntax of the language itself was the reason for the boost or if it was the
> presence of libraries of code to be leveraged or was it changes in
> technology, yada yada yada.
> 
> There is some anectdotal evidence to site that Ada is more productive than
> C++. There are some reasons based on logic and analysis that indicate that
> Ada *ought to be* more productive than C++. There are actually a few studies
> that are at least half-way scientific that indicate Ada buys you
> productivity (and error reduction). Dr. McCormic's study is the only one I
> know of that comes close to a controlled experiment and *it* shows a
> productivity increase. I think this may very well be more evidence than is
> available to indicate that C++ is more productive than C - but would anybody
> seriously challenge the latter? Why does Ada have to pass some test that C++
> can't pass?


Is Dr. McCormic the professor with the software controlling model trains?  If
so, I believe his data showed an enormous productivity increase over C (C++
????).

Larry