Re: Ada The Best Language?

["Jean-Pierre Rosen" <rosen@adalog.fr>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2376 bytes --]


"codesavvy" <codesavvy@aol.com> a �crit dans le message news: 5be89e2f.0107181029.1e09f6c0@posting.google.com...
> Didn't say this at all.  Here's what I wrote:
>
> For a programming language to be considered vastly superior (many Ada
> advocates do consider Ada to be vastly superior) I believe that
> developers utilizing the language should show a substantial increase
> in productivity or it should solve a class(es) of programming problems
> that another language can't.
>  [...]
OK, I got you point. You are really interested in productivity, all other things being equal. We could argue on this, but I won't;
if it's your view of a better language, fine.

There have been a number of studies addressing productivity and error rates in Ada compared to other programming languages. One of
the first ones was the Reifer study, that showed a minimum increase of 50% of productivity using Ada. It is a bit outdated now, and
I have it only on paper; I'm sorry I cannot provide any URL.

Another interesting one is the Rational study comparing development costs of Ada and C (not C++, agreed). I don't have the exact URL
at hand, but this one should be easily found.

There are lots of personnal experience too. Here is one from one of my clients (I guess he's reading this newsgroup, so I let to him
to disclose more if he wishes). One team was developping a project in Ada, and another one in C++. Both projects were very similar,
but the Ada team was 3 people, and the C++ team was 15. The Ada team achieved its goals, but the C++ team never did. Some times ago,
there was a proposal to add new functionnalities to the (Ada) software. Since the management was afraid of the possible costs, they
asked for an external expert to evaluate the time and cost of the modification. Given the context, the team kept a very precise
track of all effort involved. Result: the modification was performed with exactly 1/3 of the cost estimated by the expert according
to "normal practice".

This is just one example. But I think you'll find many others from the people here. And although examples don't *prove* anything, a
number of converging examples should be a serious hint that there is really something significant behind.

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (rosen@adalog.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://www.adalog.fr