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,ce1e7170ab2bc91c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-03-28 00:41:49 PST From: "Martin Dowie" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <_pNv6.15345$ue1.1278082@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <3AC0BB04.CF7F3631@west.raytheon.com> Subject: Re: Why do so many companies use Apex? Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 09:37:09 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 NNTP-Posting-Host: sg2c11210.dsge.edinbr.gmav.gecm.com Message-ID: <3ac1a0f2$1@pull.gecm.com> X-Trace: 28 Mar 2001 09:29:38 GMT, sg2c11210.dsge.edinbr.gmav.gecm.com Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!hub.org!hub.org!codeine.org!nerim.net!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!btnet-peer1!btnet-feed3!btnet!newreader.ukcore.bt.net!pull.gecm.com!sg2c11210.dsge.edinbr.gmav.gecm.com Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:6155 Date: 2001-03-28T09:37:09+01:00 List-Id: You can have circular dependant views, it just makes it tricky to do (seems a fairly Ada way of doing things). I'm not using it at my new job, so I'm afraid I can't direct you to the correct option :-( If I remember correctly Apex effectly treats them as one view from then on. I'd have to say that 25K SLOC is a small program and probably not in keeping with Rational's target audience. I can't say I'm keen on the Green Hills front end, nor are any of the engineers here how have had to use it). If you like the Visual C++ environment try Aonix's ObjectAda. If you don't like thousand of windows popping up then select the appropriate options within each window type - they can stop 'auto-appear' and enable reuse of a window type. I think I always managed to get away with about 4 windows and 2 of those were minimised pretty much all the time. My biggest gripe with Apex was the inability to turn on the optimisations - but I understand that is all fixed now. For multi-user (5+), multi-target projects, you're hard pushed to find an environment that copes as well - that's where it really comes into its own. Phaedrus wrote in message news:Un5w6.1633$aP5.137062@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net... > > Apex will enforce your system architecture by not allowing improper > > dependencies. > And not allowing such things as circular withing, whether the language > allows them or not. And not allowing circular dependencies of views. > And not allowing C/C++ code to call Ada, and not allowing Ada to > call C++... *sigh* > > > I find it very fast in compilation speed (a lot faster than our target > > compiler). > Wow, what target compiler are you using? What we need here are some > benchmarks. I found that for a given piece of code, the Rational compiler > was faster than Vax Ada, but not much. No where anywhere near as fast > as Verdix. For a 20K system, a system rebuild was (much like the Vax) started > before lunch, and then you take a long lunch. > > > If you have the problems you mention, I suggest you look at getting some > > training > Interesting concept... Why does an environment require that the developers > conform to it? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Is it a tool or a > religion? > Most of my favorite tools have required ZERO training. Let's see, how much > training does Verdix require? Learn the handful of terms "ada", "a.mklib", and > "a.ld", and you're off and running. (By the way, I consider Verdix to be a BAD > example. It's user-interface is clunky at best, and I'd like to get my hands on > the > guy who thought "a.mklib" and "a.ld" were good command names. But then, > I'm still hunting the ding-dong who first thought that "ls" was a good name for > "dir" under Unix.) > > > I can't imagine handling a large project in Ada without a tool like > > Apex. In fact, I would not work on one that didn't use Apex. I have seen how > much it > > can help a large project to be successful and I would prefer not to waste my > time > > struggling with primitive tools. > I've noticed that folks who get assimilated by the Rational collective > (Okay, so I'm not above some emotionally charged rhetoric, in case > you haven't noticed already!) tend to have this view. I personally think > that it's a case of "Well, I've been wearing sandpaper underwear all these > years, and I'd miss it if I had to go back to wearing cotton!". Maybe it's > dependent upon your definition of "primitive tools". I think that any tool, > (be it a hammer, a screwdriver, or a compiler) that forces you to do things > it's way is an artificial constraint and therefore primitive. I don't need any > more artificial constraints on the coding process, I've got enough already: > Requirements are usually in a state of flux, the customer (and most of > management!) is pretty clueless about the development process, and etc. > > I remember attending a Rational demo in 1985, we all came away > semi-impressed but asking the same question: What's it FOR? Then, > in the early 1990's I worked on a missile where management had unwisely > chose the Rational hardware for the host. Most of the developers looked at > the keyboard-from-Hell and the horrible screens, and left ASAP. Now, it's > over 15 years later than that first demo, and Rational is still expecting > the development world to conform to their strange concepts. And I'm still > not buying it. > > Phaedrus > > > > > >