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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.68.125.134 with SMTP id mq6mr25638713pbb.7.1416086937921; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:28:57 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.84.21 with SMTP id k21mr12205qgd.6.1416086937655; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:28:57 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!r10no3136225igi.0!news-out.google.com!m4ni196qag.1!nntp.google.com!u7no1918219qaz.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:28:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3d5997a0-fc19-4265-9ca4-89b004974829@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=213.108.152.51; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.108.152.51 References: <3d5997a0-fc19-4265-9ca4-89b004974829@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <7deda1bb-58a3-44a9-9f0b-05696bf13854@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: F-22 ADA Programming From: Maciej Sobczak Injection-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 21:28:57 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:23394 Date: 2014-11-15T13:28:57-08:00 List-Id: > I recall from when I was actively teaching Ada that one large DoD contrac= tor (one of the largest) decided to use C++ instead of Ada. The reason? = We can hire C++ programmers right out of college. This is rather strange. = Why would they think that recent college graduates schooled in a clunky l= anguage such as C++, where they wrote mostly toy programs using features th= at we cannot allow (notice the long list of proscriptions for JSF), who nee= d to be retaught how to use the language safely -- how can they think they = are getting any benefit? Good point, but to be fair you should note that it is not possible to pick = fresh Ada graduates and put them right in the middle of the safety critical= project, either. Do you think that JSF is long? What about "Guidance on th= e Use of Ada95 in the Development of High Integrity Systems" as a comparati= ve example? Let's try: JSF: 141 pages, ~60p are actual rules Ada guide: 111 pages, ~100 seem to contain actual rules I don't claim that the above numbers are enough to justify the language cho= ice, but certainly the picture is more complex than what you have described= . I agree that fresh graduates have to be re-taught. But this also means th= at you need the best graduates you can find. Now, if you have a big group o= f C++ graduates and a very small group of Ada ones, which group is more lik= ely (statistically) to include those best (in terms of, say, IQ or whatever= other parameter) that you actually want to employ? The statistics says that you should be looking in the bigger group and the = real life seems to confirm: personally, in my country I know a couple of ve= ry good C++ programmers and I know *ZERO* good Ada programmers. Now, where = should I be looking for good software engineers? So, you really want to target the C++ graduates. Now, whether you will spen= d your (and theirs) costly time teaching them Ada or re-teaching them C++ i= s another question, but it is not surprising that managers expect the secon= d option to be safer. > I used to ask they, "Why would you choose a programming language that is = inherently error-prone and expect an outcome that is error-free?" Because in a safety-critical project it is not the language alone that is r= esponsible for the error-free outcome. The whole point of re-teaching the g= raduates is to move out of that "inherently error-prone" zone. --=20 Maciej Sobczak * http://www.msobczak.com * http://www.inspirel.com