Re: Any research putting c above ada?

[afn03257@freenet2.afn.org (Daniel P Hudson)]

amd001@its.maynick.com.au (Andrew Dunstan) wrote:
>Matthew Givens (NKSW39B@prodigy.com) wrote:

>This is a worrying statement. If you are a skilled programmer, you
>would pick up languages like a sponge and not be worried about small

That's like saying if you are a skilled speaker you should be able
to pick up languages [German, Russian, Greek] like a sponge.

>things like syntax. If you think you are highly proficient in C but
>only moderately skilled in Ada, either you have not done enough Ada or
>you are not thinking about things at an appropriate level ... most of
>your thought should be at a language independent level.

Well, can you pick up things is say Korean or Vietnamese right now?
So then are you not thinking about things at an appropriate level?

>If you work on a large software project, this is a recipe for
>disaster. You can't just let programmers "do the thing that fits them
>temperamentally". There must be standards etc. After all, the major
>cost in most large s/w projects is not in initial coding but in
>maintenance. This is where Ada shines - it is aimed at being easily
>maintainable, easier on the reader at the cost of a little more trouble
>to the writer. That's why many programmers hate it, of course, but is
>the very reason that many more managers should love it.

Yes and no. A lot of software is designed to be ported, and this is 
where C/C++ shines. A lot of software is designed to be effecient
or interface new hardware to the system, this is where asm shines.
Every langauge shines somewhere, even if it is where the sun don't.