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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-10 10:27:28 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: softeng3456@netscape.net (soft-eng) Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Using Ada for device drivers? (Was: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died) Date: 10 May 2003 10:27:27 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <9fa75d42.0305100927.422ffb88@posting.google.com> References: <9fa75d42.0304230424.10612b1a@posting.google.com> <4a885870.0304291909.300765f@posting.google.com> <416273D61ACF7FEF.82C1D1AC17296926.FF0BFD4934A03813@lp.airnews.net> <9fa75d42.0305010621.55e99deb@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0305090937.2bbe1238@posting.google.com> <5s29SIA1KKv+EwcU@nildram.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.243.127.233 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052587648 27448 127.0.0.1 (10 May 2003 17:27:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 May 2003 17:27:28 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:63497 comp.object:63171 comp.lang.ada:37153 Date: 2003-05-10T17:27:28+00:00 List-Id: Tom Welsh wrote in message news:<5s29SIA1KKv+EwcU@nildram.co.uk>... > In article <9fa75d42.0305090937.2bbe1238@posting.google.com>, soft-eng > writes > >"Marin David Condic" wrote in message news: >$79o$1@slb0.atl.mindspring.net>... > > > >> "competent" and most had many years of experience, but still, the language > >> made a difference to the bottom line. My competitors are still using C. I > >> say "Good for them!" My improved productivity and reduced defects translates > > > >If you can indeed have improved productivity and reduced defects, > >it stands to reason that your competitor will not be doing very > >well versus you! > > > >Bottom lines do count. If time after time it so happened > >that people using Ada out-competed the ones using C, > >others would start taking notice. > > > Such "bottom-line" comparisons are usually vitiated by failure to > account for total lifetime costs (total cost of ownership). > > Having followed the software development industry for the last 20 years, > I have been struck time and again by the short-term nature of buying > decisions. Usually, people simply do not take into account how much it > will cost to maintain and/or extend an application over 10, 20 or 30 > years. Indeed, these lifetimes themselves are often grossly > underestimated - one of the reasons for the Y2K panic. Y2K impact was overestimated! > It's not surprising, as decision-makers are usually not technically > knowledgeable - and even if they were, it's more art than science. > But how many times have we heard of projects going to the low bidder, > who ends up (surprise, surprise!) costing far more than the higher > bidder with a better grip on quality? And that's just for > implementation! And how many times exactly, has this not happened due to Ada? > One of the main reasons for the whole Ada initiative was to reduce the > cost of the whole software lifecycle - not just initial development. But > because that TCO is so hard to measure, Ada has not been given credit > for reducing it. I agree that total cost is hard to measure. My point was that a language like Ada SEEMs like it is great for software development. And it is indeed great for academic exercises. But actual software development doesn't suffer much from the maladies Ada targets (it suffers from different ones.) So a cost-benefit analysis would have to assign some slight benefits to Ada but much other costs. So if you are willing to put up with lots of costs for little benefit (e.g. if you have a bottomless pit to draw funds from), Ada might be excellent.