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,bbba36730ac96f9a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: gwinn@res.ray.com (Joe Gwinn) Subject: Re: Gov't, non-DoD use of Ada Date: 1996/09/16 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 180981706 x-disclaimer: This is the author's opinion and not that of Raytheon Company. references: <4vnlgn$mko@uuneo.neosoft.com> x-authentication-warning: The author was not authenticated. content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Raytheon Electronic Systems mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-09-16T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , rwnoel@tiac.net (Bob Noel) wrote: > At least some of the systems the FAA is buying are not "full-custom" > ATC. STARS is modified COTS. The STARS specification requires > that the application software be written in FIPS-compliant Ada or C. COTS, modified or not, pretty much pushes you into use of C, as the vast bulk of existing NDI/COTS code available and suitable for ATC is written in C. I think many systems will end up with mixtures of C and Ada, as it's almost never cost effective to rewrite working fielded code just because it isn't in the language of choice, whatever that might be. Adding support for an additional language is orders of magnitude cheaper and less risky than rewriting a few hundred thousand lines of code. There isn't that much ATC stuff in C++ just yet, and it's a matter of debate whether C++ is currently mature enough for ATC use. There is one school of thought that we should wait until C++ is fully standardized (by ANSI/ISO), plus a few years for the tools and implementations to settle and mature. However, C++ is rapidly inheriting C's mantle, as the upgrade is the path of least resistance. Joe Gwinn