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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f948976d12c7ee33 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-20 21:34:34 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: "rleif" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: RE: Boeing and Dreamliner Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 21:28:05 -0700 Organization: ENST, France Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1056169949 33928 137.194.161.2 (21 Jun 2003 04:32:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 04:32:29 +0000 (UTC) To: "'Mark Lorenzen'" , Return-Path: X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 11.0.4920 Thread-Index: AcM3e4H3scI4TbL9QmG9NQAyFg9S/wAMKqgw In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail to news gateway List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39515 Date: 2003-06-20T21:28:05-07:00 The level of safety required for a commercial airliner is higher than for a fighter jet. Bob Leif -----Original Message----- From: Mark Lorenzen [mailto:mark.lorenzen@ofir.dk] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:41 PM To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Jeffrey Carter writes: > For Boeing the question should be, "How much will it cost to develop > S/W to safely fly hundreds of people in language X?" Ada still has a > tremendous advantage in that kind of situation. Achieving the > necessary reliability in most other languages, including C++, is > significantly more expensive than in Ada. Add to that the added cost > of adding C++ to existing Ada code, compared to doing the new code in > Ada, and the business decision should still point to Ada. > But the infamous: "But, we can't find any Ada programmers..." argument still sits in its dark and damp corner of a manager's office and just waits to be spoken out loud. Sadly. And now C++ is used for JSF. So the "If C++ is good enough for the worlds most expensive and advanged figther jet, then it surely is good enough for a civilian passenger jet" argument will also be used. We live in sad times. - Mark