From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 11 Dec 92 01:55:34 GMT
From: alex@MIMSY.CS.UMD.EDU  (Alex Blakemore)
Subject: Re: C++ vs. Ada -- Is Ada loosing?
Message-ID: <62752@mimsy.umd.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <11330@prijat.cs.uofs.edu> beidler@guinness.cs.uofs.edu (Jack Beidle
r) writes:
> If I build a perfect ... system, I make all my money ...
> by the time I deliver the system.  However, if I build a buggy system with un
readable 
> source code, I make money ... over the entire life of the software.
> Since I can build buggier unreadable software in 
> C and C++, naturally I want to use C and C++ so I can make more 
> money over a longer period of time.

It may not be that cynically planned, but I agree economics are a primary drive
r.
A simpler economic explanation is just that:

  the (promised) savings of Ada are experienced by the customer over the long r
un.

  the (real) cost of switching to Ada is experienced by the contractor up front
.

  the contractor has little or no incentive to save the customer money over the
 long run,
  and may in fact view serious attempts in that direction as contrary to his in
terest.

  so its not suprising that contractors often fight using Ada and that may actu
ally
  be a sign that its the right thing to do.
-- 
---------------------------------------------------
Alex Blakemore alex@cs.umd.edu   NeXT mail accepted