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: 103376,3141f12a6a7d0751 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-01-08 04:48:00 PST From: "Martin Dowie" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: Ada success story in IEEE Software Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 12:48:44 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 NNTP-Posting-Host: ed125012.sd.edinbr.gmav.gecm.com Message-ID: <3c3aea7b$1@pull.gecm.com> X-Trace: 8 Jan 2002 12:47:55 GMT, ed125012.sd.edinbr.gmav.gecm.com Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!btnet-peer0!btnet-feed5!btnet!newreader.ukcore.bt.net!pull.gecm.com!ed125012.sd.edinbr.gmav.gecm.com Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18638 Date: 2002-01-08T12:48:44+00:00 List-Id: "Dale Stanbrough" wrote in message news:dstanbro-FFA1D2.23113708012002@mec2.bigpond.net.au... > Rod Chapman wrote: > > > It's the kind of system where most people > > would not even consider Ada, but we found its use to be a significant > > factor in the success of the project. The final system achieved > > 0.04 defects per kloc (that's 4 defects in 100,000 lines of code) post- > > delivery, which compares favourably with industry norms. > > I'm not sure I follow this. If this result is the industry norm, > and most of industry doesn't use Ada, then why do you think Ada > was "a significant factor in the success of the project"? Need to re-read the original post :-) He said it "compares favourably with industry norms" not "matches the industry norms"