Re: What ada 83 compiler is *best*

[to.reply@read.my.sig (Rick Thorne)]

In article <74jpk8$p8j$1@remarQ.com>, "Pat Rogers"
<progers@NOclasswideSPAM.com> wrote:

> When answers included concrete facts you invoked aliens and
> silliness rather than discuss the data.  A killfile for the answers
> you don't like seems a strange way to learn.

I'd answer you, but I've killfiled you.  Remember?!?

;-)

I'm truly sorry about the attitude.  Let me conclude this discussion as follows.

1) You haven't provided concrete facts.  You identified studies on an
obscure web page as "hard core" evidence of Ada's greater productivity. 
The Institute for Creation Reseach offers "hard core evidence" of
Scientific Creationism too.  Ever wonder why 95% of PhDs in biological
sciences poo-poo these findings?  Simple: these people aren't scientists;
they're advocates POSING as scientists.  When AFA produces a study showing
that Ada's a better language, it's like Dow-Corning doing research on the
safety of silicon breast implants.  You'd be out of your mind to not take
the data *cum grano salis*.

2) I've read many studies touting the productivity of Ada, and I have to
say I think they're all a joke?  Why?  Think on your training as an
engineer.  To properly conduct a comparative study like this, you need to
set up the experiment under tightly controlled environments.  To conduct
an Ada vs. C++ study, you need identical development environments,
identical tools, and identical staff in order to proceed.  Additionally,
you need people who AREN'T advocates of one side over the other analyzing
the data.  Finally, you need to have ALL elements of the lifecycle
identical.  My belief: if Ada developers ACTUALLY DO beat the C++ers in
all areas (quality, development time, etc.), it's less because of the
source code and much more because of the system engineering involved. 
Most Ada organization (at least in the US) are government controlled in
some way (go to a Lockheed-Martin CDR/PDR if you don't believe this), and
the systems engineering is very tight.  The Ada people tend to get better
requirements that the C++ by virtue of their organizational domains, and
the design is usually less brittle for the same reasons.

My bottom line here: don't quote productivity studies and expect me to
believe them.  For all the reasons I've stated above, I think they're
uncontrolled and uncontrollable AND  I think the studies are aggressively
skewed by advocates on whatever side.  I've actually read an AFA study
that stated up front that the study itself needs to taken with a grain of
salt!
 

Finally: my alien statement is valid for this reason: if you go into an
alt.alien.XXX newsgroup and ask for proof, they send you to a web site. 
The only thing that proves is this: logical fallacies, 'specially those
involving personal issues and prejudices, are alive and well.

Respectfully,

-- 
? Rick Thorne                            ?  "I'm quite illiterate, ?
?     software engineer by day           ?   but I read a lot"     ?
?     harried father of two by night     ?          J. D. Salinger ?
?     rick.thorne@lmco.com               ?                         ?
?         http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/6816/             ?