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, LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,66383f4b94d281e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: James E. Hopper Subject: Re: Ada-95 Success Stories Date: 1996/05/22 Message-ID: <4nvi1u$sju@news.erinet.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 156136369 distribution: world references: <31A31039.2781E494@escmail.orl.mmc.com> <4nvakf$ljo@uuneo.neosoft.com> content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 x-xxmessage-id: organization: Personal mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-05-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <4xohnhpmck.fsf@leibniz.enst-bretagne.fr> Laurent Guerby, Laurent.Guerby@enst-bretagne.fr writes: >Richard> Well, this post is 6 days old, and there are no replys. >Richard> Guess the answer is "NO!";-). > I guess i will answer as well then. We rebuild from scratch (complete oo redesign and implmentation) of our digital radar landmass simulation (DRLMS) in Ada95 on the sgi using the sgi version of gnat. starting from a beta, we went to the initial release and then into several succeeding betas as compile was continuouly improved. our customer was amazed at how easily we upgraded form version to version. they were used to vads where each new version required almost a rewrite to get it to work. our sim is basically a very fast real time image processing program to take overhead imagery and process it using a serios of proprietary convolutions, terrain masking, and other algorithms to convert it from the visual to the radar image domain. it was approx 30,000 LOC. it processed 4 times the ammount of pixels at a faster frame rate (25hz vs 32 hz) on the same platform as our generation1 product under vads. while a lot of this was improved algorithms there were a number of areas where ada95 and gnat made signifigant speedups to what we did in version 1. Another issue of note is that we were the third contractor hired by our customer to do this work. The first two failed big time. the second contractor (who shall remain nameless) spent 2 million dollars getting to Preliminary Design Review when it became obvious from their prototypes that they were not going to be able to produce a viable product (Prototypes written in C by the way). We were brought on board went from startup to CDR in about 2 months, and we have spent approx. 1 year on it so far. end date is expected to be in the next month. total cost slightly more than half what previous contractor spent getting to preliminary design review! our developers were MUCH happier with the language, most of us would go looking for new jobs, i think, [i know i would] before we would agree to do signifigant development on VADS again after working with sgi tools. product is still in hardware/software testing, but its going pretty well considering we developed it in the states, and its being integrated in austrailia with most of the developers here in states with no access to a test environment. (customers choice) We are strong proponents of Ada95 and would not go back, or change languages short of unemployment!! ;-) Jim hopper Chief Technical Advisor Systems and Software Technology Division SAIC These comments are my interpretation of peoples feelings and DO NOT speak for SAIC!!