Re: ADA vs Java

[Preben Randhol <randhol+cla@pvv.org>]

On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 10:31:46PM +0000, HansF wrote:
> 
> - the reason for the disclaimer by many large software organizations is to
> avoid legal repercussions.  It has nothing to do with the quality of the
> compiler, nor the quality of the resultant code; and

So your saying: Use Java, C++ etc... for safety-critical applications.
The reason for the warning NOT to do so is purly legal protection and it
is not due to that the languages are not suited for the task?

About Ada and Java you can have a look at what Duncan Sands have to say
about their system. They use both languages, but Java only for the GUI.

http://www.gnat.com/aa_videos.php#

> - it may be that the attitiude of the Ada community, with respect to
> thorough analysis and test cases, is the significant contributor to the
> use of Ada in critical environments, rather than the compiler itself.

Please read up on Ada so you can put the languages perspective.
Have a look at SPARK too.

> The reason I am driving on this - I pay large quantities of money to an
> insurance company to cover myself as a consultant in the instance that I
> could be sued due to an unforeseen (not even deliverate) error or
> ommission.  This, and my standard contract disclaimer, simply means that I
> do not wish to waste all on a lawsuit - but it does NOT reflect on the
> quality I deliver.

This may cover ones back, but do one want the insurance company to bail
one out again and again because one use a tool that will more likely
make one generate errors? I would guess the premium would rise over
time...

-- 
Preben Randhol -------------- http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/Ada95 --
                 �For me, Ada95 puts back the joy in programming.�