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 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,63ceef1cf4561e32 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: Customer balks at Ada -- any hope? Date: 2000/07/18 Message-ID: <5dtGPVPqfHh5@eisner.decus.org>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 648003063 References: <8l01s4$gnr$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8l2pqo$im7$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 963966372 216.44.122.34 (Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:26:12 GMT) Organization: LJK Software NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 00:26:12 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-07-18T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <8l2pqo$im7$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, wv12@my-deja.com writes: > In article <8l01s4$gnr$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, > mjsilva@my-deja.com wrote: >> I realize that implicit in their position is a belief that Ada offers >> no great tangible benefits to the project (even though the machinery > to >> be controlled is big, expensive and remotely-located), > > C has been known to control big, expensive hardware. One such > example is the mutinode Deep Blue capable of searching a few million > nodes per second. Is the speed critical in this project? If so, I see > on reason to avoid Ada that checks every shift, rotate, add, multiply > in your software. I gather your argument is to use the controls on the Ada compiler to disable checking in the production version. My understanding is that many embedded developers do that, but I think we should leave that decision up to the technical staff on a module-by-module basis, rather than restricting them from ever using checking by choosing a language that does not provide it.