Re: Is Linux right for Embedded?

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

I currently am building embedded systems in C so it isn't as if I have no
experience on the other side. I would agree that good software engineers can
produce good code in any language - including assembler. But after having
acquired years of experience with Ada, I believe that the job is a *lot*
easier using that language as opposed to C/C++.

I would caution against relying on what I like to call the "Any *Competent*
Programmer" argument. All of us on any given day make stupid little mistakes
and I've had metric data demonstrating that a team of highly "competent"
realtime software engineers with years of experience in engine controls make
4 times fewer mistakes that made it into the lab using Ada as compared to
other languages. These were engineers that for the most part all had at
least 10 years of experience in realtime systems and working with engine
controls specifically. They were not greenhorns or morons. Yet their
productivity doubled and their error rates were reduced to a fourth of what
they were before. Many were skeptical of Ada initially but grew to
appreciate the language as they learned to use it. Languages can and do make
measurable differences in the quality & cost of the end product.

Note that the engine controls we made prior to that still had to work with
extremely high reliability, so I won't dispute that you can build a solid
product in other languages. It just costs more and requires more time. Now
that I'm working on digital TV equipment in C, I am once again reminded of
this fact as I have to constantly track down and fix errors that would
otherwise be caught automatically by a more secure programming language. The
box still needs to be reliable, so we'll end up spending lots of the
stockholder's money testing and fixing it, rather than making more and
better products - but there isn't anything I can do about that since too
many of my associates are entrenched in C and too much of the infrastructure
is reliant on C. The data is there to demonstrate that a better, more
productive job can be done in other languages - specifically Ada - but it is
hard to beat the entrenched establishment that is stuck inside the box we're
all supposed to think outside of. Oh well...

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"bgeer" <bgeer@xmission.xmission.com> wrote in message
news:9pa9of$9me$1@xmission.xmission.com...
>
> I participated in building a F16 radar simulator using no OS, C, &
> TMS320C30 processors running in parallel.  We had a good team willing
> to listen to those of us with extensive realtime experience.  The
> result was a system that could run essentially 24/7.  Ok, so this
> thing will never really fly nor kill anyone if it fails, but the fact
> is one can craft C code that doesn't fail.
>
> I also participated in an ADA based project that had a small team of
> "insiders" who wouldn't listen to "outsiders" & the result was worse
> code & less reliability.  This *was* a system meant to fly.
>
> Good coders can write good code regardless of language.  Language
> won't make marginal coders, marginal coding teams, or bad design any
> better.