From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 16 Sep 93 04:35:05 GMT From: rational.com!bonnie!rlk@uunet.uu.net (Robert Kitzberger) Subject: Re: Ada Pricing & Quality ?? - Vendors Message-ID: List-Id: srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) writes: >Less than $900, and I want a variety of CASE capabilities thrown in. I can >get this for C++, and I get a CDROM thrown in with lots of goodies. Further, >I can save much development time by reusing the many large commercial and >public domain C/C++ systems available - a factor in choosing a compiler. >Besides, a Pentium-based system is close enough to a workstation, for PC >prices to set the standard for workstation prices. What you describe applies well to the PC development market, but doesn't scale up the the large systems developed in Ada. Visual C++ gives you admirable support for single-user development of Windows based applications. It provides a great way to speed development of Windows-based user interfaces. It does NOT provide features necessary for developing large, truly mission-critical applications (now there's an overused buzzterm -- "we support your mission-critical payroll applications!") This requires a real workstation (e.g. Unix) along with remote file systems, multiple user configuration management, etc. PCs with kludgy networking setups don't cut it, unless you enjoy pain (I know, I know, NT will solve the world's Unix problems ;-). It also requires a development environment engineered from the ground up to _really_ support multiple user development, definition and enforcement of subsystem interfaces, strong typing (IMHO), inherent portability, etc. Until you convince the world to start developing 10,000,000-line applications on PCs under Windows in Visual C++, there will be a market for development environments that _are_ targetted to that market. It's not by accident that Apple develops its software on Unix workstations rather than PCs/Macs, and it's not by accident that large systems are developed on Unix systems, VAXes, R1000s, etc. rather than PCs, often in Ada. On the other hand, I concede a subset of your point: there don't appear to be any Ada development systems for PC applications that provide the capabilities of Visual C++. But the world does not revolve solely around Windows and PC applications (I find that to be one of the biggest mistakes people make when they generalize about development systems, second to the embedded/host dichotomy). I also agree that there is enormous opportunity for adding some of the features that make Visual C++ so appealing to Ada development systems. There is also enormous opportunity for C and C++ development system vendors to add features to their environments that support development of huge projects by hundreds of developers (I've received personal email on the development of OS/2 that indicate that they really needed a Rational-like development system, _not_ Visual C++). Personally, I agree with Robert Dewar and Mike Feldman that the lack of bindings (especially standardized ones, de-facto or otherwise) to existing operating systems and user interfaces are the single largest impediment to more widespread use of Ada, not the lack of OO features, for example. >>Also, cross-compilers generally cost more than native compilers because the >>development cost has to be amortized over a smaller market. > >Given that 85% of the embedded market is done in C/C++, as measured by use >and sales of products (for example, Intermetrics C compiler), Ada will never >be competitive in the embedded market as C/C++ is amortized over a much >larger market. Greg, most of the embedded systems market is composed of 8-bit microcontrollers (I'll need to ferret out an issue of Embedded Systems Programming that contains their survey results). This is clearly the realm of C and assembly, not Ada. If you looked at the market for large embedded systems, which is a small slice of the market compared to 8-bit microcontrollers, you'd see mainly Ada and some C/lint/RCS/cpp/make/xmkmf/imake systems. >In general, as long as I can get Rational-like capabilities in C++ systems >at PC prices, Ada will never be competitive. I submit that you aren't getting Rational-like capabilities in Visual C++; you're comparing apples and oranges. I don't mean to be hostile, and I'm certainly not speaking for Rational. .Bob. -- Bob Kitzberger Internet: rlk@rational.com Rational, Grass Valley, CA CompuServe: 70743,1550