Re: Linked List in ada

[Mark Johnson <mark_h_johnson@raytheon.com>]

tmoran@acm.org wrote:
> 
> > Well, i haven't tried to compile it yet. I am anti error msgs :)
>   You need to get your mind turned around.  An Ada compiler is not
> just a necessary step to producing machine code, it's an assistant
> helping you avoid error and get your program right.  [snip...]

Hmm. Let me provide a different opinion on that recommendation. If you
use the compiler as a quality check on your code review, you can get a
better quality product and better productivity. I might even recommend
this strongly to the OP since it encourages good habits (stronger code
review). Let me explain how that can work...

If you have generated say 20 defects in a program and have two people do
the compile and code review you might get the following results...
  #1 - compile flags 12 errors, code review removes 4 more (total 16), 4
left to find in unit test.
  #2 - compile flags 12 errors, code review removes 6 more (total 18), 2
left to find in unit test.
Now do them in the other order...
  #1 - code review removes 10 errors, compiler flags 6 more (total 16),
4 left to find in unit test.
  #2 - code review removes 15 errors, compiler flags 3 more (total 18),
2 left to find in unit test.
That the compiler found 6 instead of 3 errors for #1 is an indication
that the code review was poor and should be repeated.

The counter argument is usually that the compiler finds the errors
faster than you do. I agree, but the cost of letting the two extra
errors in unit test (say 1 hour to find and fix each) more than pays for
the longer code review cycle.
  --Mark