Re: Any research putting c above ada?

[Richard Riehle <rriehle@nunic.nu.edu>]

The contention is, by some, that one can develop safe software
as well in C or C++ as in Ada.  This is probably true if, in addition
to the C compiler, you also use the "checking" tools such as those
from Pure Software or Parasoft, or ... 

Ada is design to to the maximum possible checking at compile time, and
further checking at run-time.  The Ada type model, the distinction
between scope and visibility, the strict differentiation between parameter
modes, and the rigorous rules for safe pointers, all contribute to
improved software quality.  Also, Ada design practices tend to be more
like engineering than programming because the language structure leads
a software practitioner to focus early on architectural issues instead
of programming issues.  

To understand Ada, one typically needs to take an engineering view of the
software process.  Most programmers are not trained in engineering and
that lack of training manifests itself in the defect-ridden software
that populates the shelves of software stores, causes medical-devices
to crash during operating-room procedures, and jeopordizes the at-large
community daily.

Someone constrained by a lifetime of blindness will have difficulty
comprehending color.  A programmer with no understanding of engineering
may not see the difference between an engineering view of the software
process versus a computer-science view.  To really understand the value of
Ada, one must approach the software process from that engineering view.
This is not true of most other languages.  Therefore, it is easy to
learn C or C++ or Visual Basic and crank out reasonably effective software
which, when it crashes, is not lethal.  

Ada is the language of choice when failure is not an option.

Richard Riehle