Re: Ada to C++ translator?

["Ken Garlington" <Ken.Garlington@computer.org>]

Don't expect C++ to have better productivity numbers than C? Seems like a
statement that needs to be defended with data to me...

IMO, this thread is one of the reasons why Ada is so hard to sell. There are
so many claims that Ada is "obviously" better than all other options in all
other circumstances that it makes me cringe. Don't get me wrong -- I love
Ada -- but advocates hype it so hard that it sounds like used-car salesmen.
We have built products in both C and Ada; our data doesn't show a *12-to-1*
difference in debug times!


"Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@kvaerner.com> wrote in message
news:96j1bo$723@news.kvaerner.com...
:
: Robert Brantley wrote >
: >We are re-using code from a legacy system, and we have spent a lot of
: >effort on binding this legacy Ada code to the RTOS we are using.  As the
: >work
: >has progressed it has become increasing apparent how much work is
involved
: >in mating the Ada code to the RTOS and the RTOS's development tools.  A
: >great
: >deal of complexity could be cut out if we move the application code to
the
: >RTOS
: >native language or it's derivative C++.
:
: Perhaps the following table from
: http://www.rtcgroup.com/cotsjournal/cots7800/cots7800p60.html might be of
: interest when you discuss the costs of using Ada. BTW Don't expect better
: numbers from C++.
:
: |language | Lines /| Errors /     | Time /  | Total /       |
: |         | Error  | 10,000 Lines | Error   | 10,000 (hours)|
: |---------+--------+--------------+---------+---------------|
: |  Ada    |  270   |      37      |  20 min |  12.35 hours  |
: |---------+--------+--------------+---------+---------------|
: |   C     |   80   |     125      | 240 min | 500 hours     |
: +-----------------------------------------------------------+
:
: Remember time is subjective. You don't really know how much time you spend
: unless you measure.
:
:
: Greetings,
:
:
:
: