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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,677963b1aa23e668 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.flashnewsgroups.com-b7.4zTQh5tI3A!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: What's stopping you from using Ada for your next commercial project? References: Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 03:37:16 -0500 Message-ID: <82vczqyrwj.fsf@stephe-leake.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (windows-nt) Cancel-Lock: sha1:8bIaowNjuIYMqe+sz1T6EasxtKg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@flashnewsgroups.com Organization: FlashNewsgroups.com X-Trace: d25894d79df0ce029e66105696 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:19043 Date: 2011-03-11T03:37:16-05:00 List-Id: Gerd writes: > 2. Pricing for GNAT PRO would be to much for such a small development > team (I think they offer support for at leat 10 person teams). Our > customer will not pay more, only for the software to be written in > Ada. I don't understand this argument. Using Ada instead of C, I get easily a factor of 2 (I usually say 10, but let's be conservative) productivity. So you can use 2 people instead of 4, freeing up 2 for another project. People cost at least $100k per year, so you have that to spend on an Ada toolchain. GNATPRO is around $25k per year. What is the problem? I'm guessing you don't really believe the productivity factor. There is a learning curve with any new toolchain, but you imply that's not an issue. > 3. Software development is not only done on Windows and Linux. Just out of curiosity, what development OS are you using? Or are you refering to the target OS? > 4. Ada is not available for many of the processors that are used in > embedded range (e.g. NEC 850, Infineon TriCore, or - still used - 8051/ > HC11), and if there would be an Ada compiler (in fact a complete tool > chain is needed, including RT support for the bare board), then the > costs are far beyond of what would be acceptable (see Green Hills fo > example). This is a real problem, although the SoftCheck method of compiling to C and then using the C toolchain for a final step is an option. You will probably have to use a subset of the Ada runtime, but that's still far better than C. > 5. For a lot of projects not only a tool chain is needed, but a > "safety certified" tool chain is required. You seem to be implying that you can get a safety certified C toolchain for less than you would need to pay for GNATPRO. I simply don't believe that! But maybe there is an economy of scale at work; if someone can sell 100k copies of a certified C toolchain, it will be cheaper than GNATPRO. > 7. There is no experience how Ada would fit into the Autosar > architecture, that is used in automotive range. Yes, this is a learning curve, which requires up front investment. It will pay off (factor of 2 productivity). > 8. Ada tools are not adopted to systems often used in embedded range > like Windows CE or OSEK. Same as point 4. > PS: Developers with Ada know-how are not a problem here. That's good news! -- -- Stephe