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=3.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!uwmcsd1!nic.MR.NET!gonzo.eta.com!mdaly From: mdaly@gonzo.eta.com (Mike Daly) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Language Comparisons Message-ID: <630@nic.MR.NET> Date: 8 Sep 88 15:11:47 GMT Sender: news@nic.MR.NET Reply-To: mdaly@gonzo.eta.com (Mike Daly) Organization: ETA Systems, Inc., St Paul, MN List-Id: We are in the middle of a (bi-annual) language "discussion" (religious war). I would like to consider using Ada for some new projects, but I have not been able to find the kind of information I need to make a good case for the language. There seems to be little discussion that Ada is a very good choice of implementation languages when it comes to the maintanence phase of the software life cycle. I am most interested in the implementation phase right now. Can anyone point me to some studies showing the comparative costs of implementing software in Ada vs. other popular languages (Pascal, C, FORTRAN, etc.)? Is Ada 20% faster for implementation? 20% slower? How about design costs? Thanks, Mike +++ Mike Daly mdaly@gonzo.eta.com ETA Systems Inc. (612)642-3570 1450 Energy Park Drive St. Paul, MN +++ Mike Daly ETA Systems Inc. mdaly@gonzo.eta.com St. Paul, MN Standard disclaimers apply.