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: 103376,7ee10ec601726fbf X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-08 01:05:55 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!drn From: Robert*@ Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: is Ada dying? Date: 8 Oct 2001 00:38:15 -0700 Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com] Message-ID: <9prl5701m0v@drn.newsguy.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: p-362.newsdawg.com X-Newsreader: Direct Read News 2.90 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13903 Date: 2001-10-08T00:38:15-07:00 List-Id: From: Technical Report CMU/SEI-92-TR-29 ESC-TR-92-029 Ada Adoption Handbook: A Program Manager?s Guide Version 2.0 William E. Hefley John T. Foreman Charles B. Engle, Jr. John B. Goodenough October 1992 (reproduced here without persmission from CMU, notice this is almost 10 years old report!) Question: What are some of the inhibitors to adopting Ada? Answer: The following inhibitors have been encountered in adopting Ada: Compiler availability: ======================== Most major processors in use today, ranging from specialized digital signal processors (DSP) to microprocessors to mainframe computers and super computers, have Ada compilers. There were 501 totalvalidated Ada compilers on the official AJPO list (as of October 1992). This number has grown from 78 validated compilers in May 1987, and only 14 in early 1986. See Appendices A.2 and B.3 for online and printed sources of the current listing. If no compiler is available for the selected hardware, see Section 7.2.1 for an action plan and several alternative solutions. Ada and embedded systems: The Ada language design team emphasized supporting modern software engineering practices; the result is a language with wide applicability in developing wellengineered, quality software. In fact, Ada has been used successfully for MIS and Corporate Information Management (CIM) applications [87]. There are no technical reasons why Ada cannot be used successfully, and cost-effectively, for such applications [64, 87]. DoD policy and Ada: ==================== Current DoD policy requires that Ada be used for new defense systems and for major software upgrades of existing systems, where cost effective. See Section 3.2 for a brief description of the waiver process for efforts that cannot comply with the policy. New technology: ================ A new technology always introduces risks, but now that Ada has matured, the risks from adopting Ada have been significantly reduced. Recent studies have shown that, in organizations that have completed several Ada projects, Ada can be at least as cost-effective, if not more so, as other languages that have traditionally been used for developing large, software-intensive systems [39, 193, 81]. Lack of knowledge: ===================== A lack of knowledge of software engineering and Ada can delay the transition to Ada. Software engineering has not yet attained the recognition or acceptance of other academic disciplines. Education in software engineering is not as available, comprehensive, or complete as in established engineering disciplines. An effective training program is a key part of developing an organizations software engineering capability [147]. Ada training, supported by appropriate software engineering training, can assist an organization in improving that capability. DoD procurement process: The current procurement process may not be conducive to Ada adoption and long-term software engineering improvement. A recent survey of Ada adoption indicates that lowest development cost still is the major award factor on DoD contracts, and that defense contractors perceive the DoD as unwilling to trade lower life-cycle cost for greater development cost [49]. Early perceptions: =================== In the face of criticisms of early, and thus immature, Ada implementations, there has been little advertising of successful Ada efforts, such as those described in [87, 94] or the Experiencetrack of the TRI-Ada conferences [108, 97, 38], and little concerted effort to gather, analyze, and distribute objective data about the economic impact of Ada on the software engineering discipline. The early bad press has left a legacy because of weaknesses of early implementations and the experiences of early Ada projects. Language issues: ================== Real and perceived language limitations have hampered the adoption of Ada. The Ada Joint Program Office (AJPO) has emphasized a strict validation process that has yielded hundreds of validated compilers. Great progress has been made in Ada compiler technology, including the development of optimizing compilers for many processors. Clearly, the image of Ada implementations having poor performance and quality is much outdated; projects should evaluate Ada implementations in light of their specific requirements.