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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOTS_OF_MONEY,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,447bd1cf7a88c198
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-15 16:50:14 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!216.218.236.179.MISMATCH!news!news.he.net!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.gblx.net!newsfeed.mathworks.com!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Do we need "Mission-Critical" software? Was: What to Do?
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 00:36:13 GMT
Organization: Deja.com
Message-ID: <94051t$eqf$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
References: <3A635D76.C5A6944D@west.raytheon.com>
 <4CJ86.129146$A06.4109981@news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14
X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Jan 16 00:36:13 2001 GMT
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (OS/2; U)
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x57.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4033
Date: 2001-01-16T00:36:13+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article
<4CJ86.129146$A06.4109981@news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com>,
  tmoran@acm.org wrote:
> > ... Of course when these same people work on the Ada
projects,
> > their Ada code looks a lot like C :-)
>     There are probably some advantages to using C-in-Ada over
just
> plain C, but they are surely a lot less than properly and
fully
> using Ada.  What fraction of "Ada" code is really fully Ada,
and
> not C-in-Ada or Fortran-in-Ada etc?


Well I am sure no one has enough experience to answer this
authoritatively, but I can definitely say from seeing millions
of lines of code from our customers that VERY little if any
would fairly be called C-in-Ada or Fortran-in-Ada.

Actually if anything, I get more worried by people pulling
out all the stops and mixing discriminants, private types,
generics, tagged types etc in frighteningly ambitious
combinations :-)


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/