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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d89b08801f2aacae X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-01 22:29:51 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!psiuk-p2!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is strong typing worth the cost? Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 14:50:17 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1020279020 19666 136.170.200.133 (1 May 2002 18:50:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 May 2002 18:50:20 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23393 Date: 2002-05-01T18:50:20+00:00 List-Id: wrote in message news:FnWz8.4427$4%6.2697137369@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com... > The relevant question is "what is likely to make me money". There's > rarely "rigorous, *scientific* proof" available (except on late night > TV), so you go with half baked evidence and statistical probabilities. This is the reason that I won't demand scientific proof before adopting Ada. There is some reasonable level of evidence and logic behind the choice and absolute proof isn't necessary. I've seen it make money. OTOH, there are "skeptics" who will want more evidence than is available. For those unwilling to approach it with an open mind, no amount of evidence will satisfy them. The best you can hope for is that the more reasonable and rational companies will adopt the better technology and out-compete the rest. > company to perform the experiment. If you have 100 programmers, > it's worth investing 16 man years in the experiment. > So the obvious question is "why haven't large companies with many > programmers and a long time horizon, done the experiment yet?" Many of them do not perceive themselves to be in the software business. Those that do percieve of themselves as having a large interest in software probably have not had the idea presented in a way that makes some business sense. Besides, its *real* hard to get R&D $$$ out of a company for anything that starts looking "fundamental" rather than geared at directly developing/enhancing a product. (Much more the realm of academia or the government.) There was the Software Productivity Consortium (is it still out there?) which was basically an attempt by several companies to get some research work done that was a little more "fundamental" in nature. I don't remember a whole lot coming out of that. It might be a clever idea to propose an experiment on language productivity under a similar aegis and get some big software developers (including Government?) to foot the bill. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com