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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ce1e7170ab2bc91c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-03-27 11:08:57 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!4.1.16.34!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!lsanca1-snf1!news.gtei.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Phaedrus" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <_pNv6.15345$ue1.1278082@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <3AC0BB04.CF7F3631@west.raytheon.com> Subject: Re: Why do so many companies use Apex? X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 18:56:52 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.178.103.28 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 985719412 209.178.103.28 (Tue, 27 Mar 2001 10:56:52 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 10:56:52 PST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:6132 Date: 2001-03-27T18:56:52+00:00 List-Id: > Apex will enforce your system architecture by not allowing improper > dependencies. And not allowing such things as circular withing, whether the language allows them or not. And not allowing circular dependencies of views. And not allowing C/C++ code to call Ada, and not allowing Ada to call C++... *sigh* > I find it very fast in compilation speed (a lot faster than our target > compiler). Wow, what target compiler are you using? What we need here are some benchmarks. I found that for a given piece of code, the Rational compiler was faster than Vax Ada, but not much. No where anywhere near as fast as Verdix. For a 20K system, a system rebuild was (much like the Vax) started before lunch, and then you take a long lunch. > If you have the problems you mention, I suggest you look at getting some > training Interesting concept... Why does an environment require that the developers conform to it? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Is it a tool or a religion? Most of my favorite tools have required ZERO training. Let's see, how much training does Verdix require? Learn the handful of terms "ada", "a.mklib", and "a.ld", and you're off and running. (By the way, I consider Verdix to be a BAD example. It's user-interface is clunky at best, and I'd like to get my hands on the guy who thought "a.mklib" and "a.ld" were good command names. But then, I'm still hunting the ding-dong who first thought that "ls" was a good name for "dir" under Unix.) > I can't imagine handling a large project in Ada without a tool like > Apex. In fact, I would not work on one that didn't use Apex. I have seen how much it > can help a large project to be successful and I would prefer not to waste my time > struggling with primitive tools. I've noticed that folks who get assimilated by the Rational collective (Okay, so I'm not above some emotionally charged rhetoric, in case you haven't noticed already!) tend to have this view. I personally think that it's a case of "Well, I've been wearing sandpaper underwear all these years, and I'd miss it if I had to go back to wearing cotton!". Maybe it's dependent upon your definition of "primitive tools". I think that any tool, (be it a hammer, a screwdriver, or a compiler) that forces you to do things it's way is an artificial constraint and therefore primitive. I don't need any more artificial constraints on the coding process, I've got enough already: Requirements are usually in a state of flux, the customer (and most of management!) is pretty clueless about the development process, and etc. I remember attending a Rational demo in 1985, we all came away semi-impressed but asking the same question: What's it FOR? Then, in the early 1990's I worked on a missile where management had unwisely chose the Rational hardware for the host. Most of the developers looked at the keyboard-from-Hell and the horrible screens, and left ASAP. Now, it's over 15 years later than that first demo, and Rational is still expecting the development world to conform to their strange concepts. And I'm still not buying it. Phaedrus