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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1143c4,7d107e452bdd8496 X-Google-Attributes: gid1143c4,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,1db77fbb2768946e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 115aec,7d107e452bdd8496 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-01 11:56:11 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: linux.dev.kernel,comp.realtime,comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is Linux right for Embedded? Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 14:42:36 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9padet$d5j$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <3BB69F21.B5AA7451@intercom.com> <9p84tm$1ovg$1@news.cybercity.dk> <9pa0in$8bb$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9pa9of$9me$1@xmission.xmission.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1001961757 13491 136.170.200.133 (1 Oct 2001 18:42:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Oct 2001 18:42:37 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com linux.dev.kernel:4063 comp.realtime:3910 comp.lang.ada:13591 Date: 2001-10-01T18:42:37+00:00 List-Id: 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" 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.