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,MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,e1a91c4d90acda97 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,e1a91c4d90acda97 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-18 10:52:05 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!63.208.208.143!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!hermes.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail From: k_e_n_s_a_i@my-deja.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: Safety-Critical Systems Developed Using C++ Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 18:42:08 GMT Organization: Deja.com Message-ID: <947ddu$jpd$1@nnrp1.deja.com> References: <945eeq$vmk$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3A664EC4.6F679BE0@acm.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.239.85.153 X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Jan 18 18:42:08 2001 GMT X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT) X-Http-Proxy: 1.1 x72.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 208.239.85.153 X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDk_e_n_s_a_i Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4179 comp.lang.c++:40419 Date: 2001-01-18T18:42:08+00:00 List-Id: In article <3A664EC4.6F679BE0@acm.org>, Marin David Condic wrote: > You'll get a lot of argument there from this crowd! :-) > > I had a ten year study of error rates in embedded code for safety critical > systems. Moving to Ada reduced the error rates by a factor of four. Same > programmers. Same problem domain. Same sort of system architecture. No way > around it. Ada's compile time checking, strong typing, etc., reduced the > error rates. And not by just a little. hehe... excellent point. I should have qualified my original statement by saying that I was speaking abstractly. I've never programmed in ADA, but will certainly grant that some languages are more prone to introduce or exacerbate programmer error than others. C/C++ has always been my example of an unforgiving and error-prone language, I just also happen to like it. Still, I would think it unlikely that military systems or other critical applications would be programmed in C/C++, even if some departments/projects seem to be switching to Windows as the foundation for their systems (someone please explain that one to me... not to drag this into the real of advocacy). Also, it takes a long time for things to get approval for military use in the US, which immediately excludes C++ from the list of possible candidates. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/