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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, FREEMAIL_REPLY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,be9bf965710b207c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-20 05:43:31 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: codesavvy@aol.com (codesavvy) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: official recommendations of Ada Date: 20 Jul 2001 05:43:31 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5be89e2f.0107200443.678562ea@posting.google.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.7.149.162 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 995633011 4037 127.0.0.1 (20 Jul 2001 12:43:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-support@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Jul 2001 12:43:31 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10327 Date: 2001-07-20T12:43:31+00:00 List-Id: 18k11tm001@sneakemail.com (Russ) wrote in message news:... > I work in an environment dominated by C/C++, and I would like to > recommend Ada for a safety-critical application that is about to be > initiated. Excellent, you're probably going to have an incredibly hard sell because: 1. There is probably so much legacy C/C++ code around. 2. Management probably has quite a bit of experience in managing C/C++ projects. 3. The developers have a lot of C/C++ experience. 4. Management probably has little or no experience in managing Ada development projects. 5. There are probably at least some developers that are not experienced with Ada and have a major learning curve to overcome. >From management's view point, using Ada instead of C/C++ is taking a major risk and when push comes to shove management probably will not take such a risk unless they can see the "payback" in using Ada. I'm sorry but I doubt if management will find papers recommending Ada for safety critical applications compelling. Qualitative arguments regarding the advantages of Ada will probably fall on deaf ears. Quantitative arguments regarding productivity advantages have a decent chance of being received well. As has been pointed out in another thread, there has to be a consensus on a metric that measures productivity effectively. If there is and management collects the appropriate data you may convince them to try Ada on some small project and collect the appropriate data to measure Ada productivity. If productivity is not being measured currently I'd start there. BTW you do run the risk of being labled a malcontent. I'd save the $100 unless I was really interested in having the hard copy as a standard. I think official recommendations of respected standards > organizations will carry a lot of weight. I came across a reference to > IEC-1508, for example, which apparently recommends Ada. However, the > document must be ordered and costs over $100. Yes, I should go ahead > and get it, but I am wondering if the actual Ada recommendation is > available online somewhere. Also, does anyone know of other official > recommendations of Ada over other languages for critical software > (either online or available through snail-mail)? Thanks.