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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a2fcc2648d0bc573
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Howie (Torsten Kleine Buening)" <bunring@uni-muenster.de>
Subject: Re: Ada for Boeing 777
Date: 1996/02/23
Message-ID: 
 <Pine.A32.3.91.960223151242.27868B-100000@asterix.uni-muenster.de>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 140820994
references: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960219111334.8550B-100000@L10SUN8>
 <3129CE98.377D@mtm.syr.ge.com>
content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1
organization: Westfaelische Wilhelms-Universitaet Muenster, Germany
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-02-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 20 Feb 1996, Steve Howard wrote:

> Date: Tue, 20 FEB 1996 08:37:28 -0500=20
> From: Steve Howard <howard@mtm.syr.ge.com>
> Newgroups: comp.lang.ada
> Subject: Re: Ada for Boeing 777=20
>=20
> Frank Petranka quoted:
> >   "What we have learned so far about the use of Ada on the 777 is a mix=
ed
> >    message. ... We found no correlation between the languages used and
> >    the number of problems found on the system.  We found instances wher=
e
> >    Ada was used effectively, and the developers felt it substantially
> >    reduced software integration problems.  In other cases, development
> >    was hampered by problems with compilers and other support tools....
> >=20
> >    The richness and complexity of the language helped knowledgeable use=
rs
> >    with mature tools achieve modest productivity gains.  However, the
> >    complexity of the language caused headaches for other users who had
> >    to work through compiler problems. ..."
> >=20
>=20
> Although I am not familiar with the article, or the project for that matt=
er,=20
> it sounds like the problems that they had have more to the tools chosen
> than Ada itself. The fact that the developers found it much easier to=20
> integrate the system speaks volumes for the effectiveness of Ada, since
> IMHO this is the hardest part of large system development, and one of
> Ada's strongest attributes.
>=20
> We had similar experience with the development of the AN/BSY-2 Combat sys=
tem
> for the Seawolf Submarine (3.5+ million lines, mostly Ada).=20
>=20
> > Am I expecting too much from Ada?
>=20
> Not necessarily. Much depends on the experience of the engineers, the dev=
elopment
> process used, and the tools in place. Engineers who have previously writt=
en in C
> often find ways around the protective features of Ada to fit C developmen=
t style,
> for example.... (sure to start a flame war, but what the heck)
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> E. Steve Howard                | Lockheed Martin
>                                | Ocean, Radar, & Sensor Systems       =20
> mailto:howard@mtm.syr.ge.com   | Syracuse, NY
>=20
>=20
At the end it is just the the question how good you can fool your language.

--
 T. Kleine B=FCning=09=09 | Univ. Muenster Germany
=09=09=09=09 | Operation Research and Computer Techn.
 mailto : bunring@uni_muenster.de=09