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: 1014db,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney)
Subject: Re: Any research putting c above ada?
Date: 1997/04/10
Message-ID: <mheaney-ya023680001004972332200001@news.ni.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 232234846
References: <5ih6i9$oct$1@waldorf.csc.calpoly.edu>
Organization: Estormza Software
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-10T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <5ih6i9$oct$1@waldorf.csc.calpoly.edu>,
kgoldin@galaxy.csc.calpoly.edu (Konstantin B. Goldin) wrote:

>Hello,
>
>Is there any research out there, that, comparing c and ada, (or c++ and
>ada), gives advantage to the c side? 
>
>This is very important for my school work, so far everything proves that ada
>is better.

Well, you should quantify what you mean by "better," but yes, Ada _is_ a
better language.

I know of one paper that gives only lukewarm support for Ada's cost
effectiveness.  Don Reifer, a consultant and former AJPO head, published
data demonstrating that Ada and C/C++ are all better than 3GL's, but his
data doesn't show that Ada (83) is any more cost effective than C and C++. 
His paper is online at:

<http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/1996/jul/quantify.html>
<mailto:d.reifer@ieee.org>

He did state, however, that Ada does hold a cost advantage in airborne and
spaceborne avionics, and that the jury was still out on Ada 95 because of
the newness of the standard.  (I can state from my personal experience,
though, that Ada 95 is a most bitchin' language.  Finally, we have silenced
the silly debates about Ada not being "truly" object-oriented.)

Steve Zeigler of Rational did a fascinating study that showed Ada was
clearly more cost effective than C:
 
<http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/docs/reports/cada/cada_art.html>

John McCormick is a SUNY professor who teaches a real-time programming
class.  When he switched from teaching the class in C to teaching it in
Ada, a significantly greater number of teams were able to complete the
projects:

<http://www.acm.org/sigada/news/suny.html>

These papers present _facts_ and _data_.  Be cautious of rock-throwing
programmers who dismiss Ada by citing specious
can't-buy-a-compiler-at-CompUSA arguments, and who haven't actually _tried_
Ada.  These poor souls just don't _get_ it, and prefer to spend their time
programming instead of constructing working systems.

Visit the ammunition link at the Home of the Brave Ada Programmers for
lot's more examples that demonstrate Ada's efficacy.

<http://www.adahome.com/Ammo/>

Ada simply allows the software engineer to practice software engineering. 
If you are not a software engineer, then of course Ada won't help you.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Heaney
Software Development Consultant
<mailto:matthew_heaney@acm.org>
(818) 985-1271