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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,971aa11c293c3db1 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-19 21:12:19 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: byhoe@greenlime.com (Adrian Hoe) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada The Best Language? Date: 19 Jul 2001 21:12:19 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <9ff447f2.0107192012.fc33860@posting.google.com> References: <5be89e2f.0107170838.c71ad61@posting.google.com> <9j1uio$8br$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <5be89e2f.0107171810.1cee29c0@posting.google.com> <9j46bt$3qj$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <5be89e2f.0107181237.4ab3594@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.106.197.210 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 995602339 21668 127.0.0.1 (20 Jul 2001 04:12:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-support@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Jul 2001 04:12:19 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10302 Date: 2001-07-20T04:12:19+00:00 List-Id: codesavvy@aol.com (codesavvy) wrote in message news:<5be89e2f.0107181237.4ab3594@posting.google.com>... > "Marin David Condic" wrote in message news:<9j46bt$3qj$1@nh.pace.co.uk>... > > Well, if Ada has nothing to offer and this is obvious then why are you > > bothering to a) read this newsgroup and b) post to it at all? > > > If you have a serious question about Ada and its potential benefits and are > > willing to entertain the possibility that maybe Ada *is* a better choice > > than C++, then we will be more than happy to point to resources for you or > > help you learn the language or answer questions about the language. But a > > blanket statement that seems to be saying "Ada is s**t! Why are you guys > > bothering???" seems more calculated to start a flame war than to get a > > serious question answered. > > > > You must have missed my other post where I stated that Ada 95 is an > excellent language and may actually be better than C++. However, I > don't feel that developer productivity is significantly enhanced with > Ada 95 as opposed to C++. I have asked if anyone knew of a study > where the conclusion was that Ada 95 increased productivity and so far > I've only been chastised. Perhaps if we can agree on what is meant by > "significantly more productive" we could carry on a rational > discussion. We would have to agree on the context of productivity and > how it is measured. I offered up a strawman in another post. Statistics? Please take a look at http://greenlime.com/Ada-Malaysia. I admit that the statistic published in Ada-Malaysia is not "the best" statistic but it can give you a rough idea. It is hard to produce an accurate statistics in the real development simply because the lack of resources to keep track everything. In my personal experience, Ada has "significantly" increased my productivity as well as my colleagues'. This was reflected in my company over-time claims. This wasn't published in Ada-Malaysia. Adrian Hoe Just my 2 cents, not my employer's.