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: 115aec,7d107e452bdd8496 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public X-Google-Thread: 1143c4,7d107e452bdd8496 X-Google-Attributes: gid1143c4,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,1db77fbb2768946e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-04 06:46:31 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: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 09:40:23 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9phos9$a1f$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <3BB69F21.B5AA7451@intercom.com> <9pcvbn$r52$1@xmission.xmission.com> <9pd4s402bga@drn.newsguy.com> <9pfcps$p0l$1@xmission.xmission.com> <9pfeiu$cfr$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9pfj8a$ebc$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9pfuqg$ikl$1@nh.pace.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1002202825 10287 136.170.200.133 (4 Oct 2001 13:40:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Oct 2001 13:40:25 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:4615 comp.realtime:3965 comp.lang.ada:13718 Date: 2001-10-04T13:40:25+00:00 List-Id: "Preben Randhol" wrote in message news:slrn9rng85.220.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no... > On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 17:09:35 -0400, Marin David Condic wrote: > > > > Everything you say is true, but when talking to people who develop > > throw-away code, the emphasis should be on time-to-market and reliability > > rather than long-term benefits such as reduced maintenance or reusable code. > > I cannot see that Ada wouldn't accommodate on all these areas. :-) > My point was that Ada accommodates all of these things - its just that long-term support costs aren't of much interest to many developers because they don't have a "long-term" to care about. In other words, focus on what a given user *does* care about and explain how Ada helps get them the things that are important to them. Yes, there are long-term benefits from Ada. There are also time-to-market benefits (because of early problem detection/prevention, abstraction, code reuse, etc.) and end-product quality improvemets (also from early problem detection/prevention) > > My hope is that the folks in the fast-moving throw-away market are > throwing themselves out with the bath water :-) I mean "Good Enough" > isn't "Good Enough" for the comsumer when he suddenly finds himself with > a negative bank account on Monday morning due to an software error in a > banks software which is fixed soonest next day more likely next week. Or > There is nothing wrong with throw-away code for some problem domains. Ada can be used to develop throw-away code - it will also improve the quality of that throw-away code. The problem isn't that code is written, used and discarded rather than maintained/enhanced. The problem is that the discardable code wasn't of very good quality in the first place. There is such a thing as a "high quality paper towel" and not all towels need to be made of terrycloth. :-) 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/