P. Cnudde VH14 (8218) (cnuddep@sh.bel.alcatel.be) wrote: : Hello, : First of all I want to say that the point of this mail is not : to start endless Ada vs C/C++ discussions, but to have an open : minded talk about Reuse and the influence of the language on reuse. : A lot of people talk about reuse but does anybody have experience : with a company wide reuse system. Not only different development : teams but also different locations should be supported. comp.software-eng might be a more suitable group for this question particually for case tool support for reuse. and perhaps also comp.sw.components. There are probably general OO groups too. I have not added them to the groups because you have already crossposted to 5 groups which is more than enough. : I see the following topics: : 1. Language independent: : * Reuse database search methods : * Distribution of reusable components to the engineer who reuses : the component. (Source code or compiled version, function based or : library based) Depends on what you are trying to reuse and how. May need all of them. : * Can everybody in de company develop reusable modules or should only : one team make such functions Generally it is recomended that your applications developers should be different from your reusable library developers because they have different and conflicting goals. : * is it usefull to reuse really small functions (<5 lines of code) : or is the overhead to great. When is it usefull to think about reuse? You will normally need some as part of any reusable library to give a sutable level of abstraction. There can also be small functions which are usefully reused on their stand alone value [Eg strlen] : * What about the psychological problems (Not Invented Here) We have a "Proudly found elsewhere award"! : * Who responsible for the reusable functions (the originator or the user)? The library maintainer. : * How to avoid "Ariane-5" disasters? You have missed out a lot of reuse by concentrating on code reuse. Specifications, architectures, algorithms all can be reusable. : 2. Language dependent. : * Language "Package-library" support. Is Ada here better ? : * Object Orientation, does it really help for reuse? Objects are a convenient packaging mechanism, not a wonder cure. Most of the problems with reusing objects are the same as those for any reasonably well structured code. : * Generics, (or templates) is it needed, or can we have a reuse : system without it? Again a convenient mechanism for delivering one type of reuse. : PS. Does anybody in comp.lang.vhdl tried real reuse using VHDL. : (That's the language I am most interested in) : Regards, : -- : ____________ Peter Cnudde : \ / Alcatel Telecom : \ ALCATEL/ Switching Systems Division : \ BELL / Microelectronics Design Center : \ / : \ / F. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerp : \/ BELGIUM : e-mail : cnuddep@sh.bel.alcatel.be : Phone : +32 3 240 82 18 : Fax : +32 3 240 99 47 Did you kow that long signatures are disliked. Half a dozen lines should be more than enough. The standard 'Rules for posting to Usenet' sujests 2 or 3 lines as enough. -- Stephen Baynes baynes@ukpsshp1.serigate.philips.nl Philips Semiconductors Ltd Southampton My views are my own. United Kingdom Are you using ISO8859-1? Do you see � as copyright, � as division and � as 1/2?