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,c6e9700a33963193 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Richard D Riehle Subject: Re: The future of Ada Date: 1999/03/11 Message-ID: <7c92hb$r8n@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 453884980 References: <36E690FA.4B9C@sandia.gov> <7c7coa$nvt$4@plug.news.pipex.net> <1999Mar11.080820.1@eisner> Organization: Netcom X-NETCOM-Date: Thu Mar 11 12:37:31 PM CST 1999 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-03-11T12:37:31-06:00 List-Id: In article <1999Mar11.080820.1@eisner>, kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) wrote: >Depending on your organization, an equivalently strong statement to >"it WILL not work" is "it WILL not be delivered on time". There is another argument in favor of Ada that is beginning to manifest itself in organizations converting to C++: employee turnover. It seems that, once the Ada programmers are trained in C++ (we are now doing some of that training), they are more able to present that skill to other employers. In fact, a large number of Ada programmers who learn C++ register with a "brain-transplant specialist" (recruiter) in search of greener pastures. Then they need to be replaced. If DoD contractors were more thoughtful about this, they would realize that Ada is a good language choice to prevent employee turnover. It is really important to retain people with a knowledge of the application. And consider the cost of getting security clearances for new hires! In the long run, Ada is far more cost effective than C++ for DoD software. The problem is that the people making the decision fail to evaluate all the total costs. The popularity of C++ is exactly the wrong reason for choosing it on a DoD weapon system. Richard Riehle http://www.adaworks.com