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: 103376,119826e558c913d7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Tom Hargraves" Subject: Re: Ada vs. C++ in defense projects Date: 2000/11/04 Message-ID: <3a04bb7a@rsl2.rslnet.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 689777636 References: <8tv04t$n80$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: van-port43.imag.net X-Trace: 4 Nov 2000 17:44:26 -0800, van-port43.imag.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Date: 2000-11-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: The US company I work for are currently bidding for a multi million $ US Navy project and specifying java as the implementation language. This proves there is no logic in this world, and is the reason I am learning Java. Such is life... I am just thankful they didn't choose C++ Tom H. wrote in message news:8tv04t$n80$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Hello everyone (this is in response to Mike Silva, Richard Riehle et > al)- > > I am on a project now which is mixed Ada and C++. I find it frightening > that many defense contractors are pushing C++ for critical defense > systems. C++ is, IMO, an extremely poor choice for defense systems for > many reasons, not the least of which include portability, readability, > maintainability, and memory corruption due to invalid type casts and > over-writing array bounds. As far as I am concerned, there is no > financial or technical justification for using C++ on these kinds of > projects. RE: the "high cost of training people in Ada," I know of an > excellent source of Ada training we have used in the past at about > $1K/student. I would wager we have spent far more than that per C++ > programmer chasing bugs caused by uninitialized data structures, bad > type casts, overwritten array bounds etc. > > IMO, the only reason C++ is chosen by mgmt and some engineers is that > most of us remember the big defense downturn of the late 80's and early > 90's. If you want to go work for Microsoft or a dot com, or if you want > your resume ready just in case, it is a lot better to be able to say "I > managed a team of 50 C++ programmers and we developed a 40 KSLOC > distributed real-time C++ application" or "As a S/W engineer at company > X, I wrote 10 KSLOC of C++ on my last project." Because of this "resume > factor," engineers and managers in the defense industry are willing > (albeit often unintentional) collaborators on the move to C++. > > When you couple this with amazing trends like the preference for Windows > NT as the information infrastructure for the CVN-77 (new Navy carrier), > you can begin to believe that it would be in America's best interest for > the government to pay M$ to re-write Windows, Office, Access, Project > and SQL Server in Ada. The way I see it, M$ would like it since they > could improve their products at taxpayer expense, consumers would get > more reliable software, and the DoD would get a better infrastructure > for the CVN-77 and future projects! (tongue-in-cheek here) > > - Mike > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.