Re: Improving Ada's image - Was: 7E7 Flight Controls Electronics

[Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com>]

I was wondering if anyone was going to say it. :-)

IMHO, Ada is a good language and it can make a difference in getting a 
system produced faster and of higher quality - all other things being 
equal. Since things are seldom equal, one can imagine scenarios wherein 
using C++ or something else might actually get the job done faster and 
of higher quality than with Ada.

Even if Ada is better at getting a system out the door quicker and with 
fewer bugs, is it *that* much better to justify its use over some other 
tool? Does it produce enough difference on the bottom line of the 
business to warrant using it in the face of all the negatives? (Lack of 
trained staff, lack of sufficient tools, lack of libraries, lack of 
industry support, lack of corporate experience, etc...) Whatever the 
objections are to using Ada, they can only be overcome if there is 
enough economic benefit to selecting that technology to outweigh the 
cost of doing so. Is it enough benefit to outweigh the risks? Does it 
impact the bottom line enough to justify swimming against the tide?

In other words, let's quit throwing spitballs at the project managers 
who pick something other than our favorite language and stop calling 
them idiots for doing so. Chances are, there is some reasonable 
justification behind their decision and if *we* would make a different 
decision then *we* should step up to the plate, take on the job of being 
a project manager, be responsible for the bottom line, put our jobs and 
the jobs of those who work for us on the line and make the decision 
ourselves. (Or is it just easier to sit on the sidelines and criticize 
those who actually *do* have to make those tough decisions and take 
those risks?)

If we're really convinced that we've got a better technology that is of 
sufficient benefit that it can show up on the bottom line of the 
financial report, then we ought to be dreaming up ways of using Ada in 
making and selling a product. Anybody who has an interesting venture 
they'd like to discuss can always talk to me about it & perhaps we come 
up with something. ;-)

MDC


Berend de Boer wrote:
>>>>>>"Marin" == Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> writes:
>>>>>
> 
>     Marin> Or is it that Ada just doesn't bring enough advantage to a
>     Marin> development effort and it wouldn't show on the bottom line?
> 
> True, no proof exist for this. Competent programmers write good, clear
> and maintainable programs regardless of the language (except Perl
> perhaps).
> 
> There is no absolute, undeniable proof that using Eiffel or Ada does
> make this process faster. There is no proof that debugging time is
> drastically less. There is no proof that maintainance is lower.
> 
> There is no proof that even it it was the case it matters more than
> 10% of the total budget.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm using Eiffel and believe that those languages
> make a difference to the bottom line, but it is just belief.
> 
> 
> And even if there were really hard facts, would that alter a lot? Just
> look at other sciences and pseudo-sciences. Facts don't alter human
> behaviour.
> 


-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm

Send Replies To: m   o   d   c @ a   m   o   g
                    c   n   i       c   .   r

     "Face it ladies, its not the dress that makes you look fat.
     Its the FAT that makes you look fat."

         --  Al Bundy

======================================================================