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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1db77fbb2768946e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1143c4,7d107e452bdd8496 X-Google-Attributes: gid1143c4,public X-Google-Thread: 115aec,7d107e452bdd8496 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-01 10:55:03 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.stealth.net!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr12.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Pat Rogers" Newsgroups: linux.dev.kernel,comp.realtime,comp.lang.ada References: <3BB69F21.B5AA7451@intercom.com> <9p84tm$1ovg$1@news.cybercity.dk> <9pa0in$8bb$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9pa9of$9me$1@xmission.xmission.com> Subject: Re: Is Linux right for Embedded? X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.191.176.121 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr12.news.prodigy.com 1001958875 ST000 208.191.176.121 (Mon, 01 Oct 2001 13:54:35 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 13:54:35 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: Q[OUS^[BTRU[RID[N[OJNW@@YJ_ZTB\MV@BNMRQIMASJETAANVW[AKWZE\]^XQWIGNE_[EBL@^_\^JOCQ^RSNVLGTFTKHTXHHP[NB\_C@\SD@EP_[KCXX__AGDDEKGFNB\ZOKLRNCY_CGG[RHT_UN@C_BSY\G__IJIX_PLSA[CCFAULEY\FL\VLGANTQQ]FN Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 17:54:35 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com linux.dev.kernel:4055 comp.realtime:3909 comp.lang.ada:13590 Date: 2001-10-01T17:54:35+00:00 List-Id: "bgeer" wrote in message news:9pa9of$9me$1@xmission.xmission.com... > "Marin David Condic" writes: > >I've used Ada to build jet and rocket engine controls with no COTS OS (bare > >machine - our own "executive") where failure was not an option. Compared to > >other languages we used, we got a doubling of productivity and a four-fold > >reduction in errors. We considered it a major step forward in reliability & > >could see no reason to go elsewhere. > > I participated in building a F16 radar simulator using no OS, C, & > TMS320C30 processors running in parallel. We had a good team willing > to listen to those of us with extensive realtime experience. The > result was a system that could run essentially 24/7. Ok, so this > thing will never really fly nor kill anyone if it fails, but the fact > is one can craft C code that doesn't fail. > > I also participated in an ADA based project that had a small team of > "insiders" who wouldn't listen to "outsiders" & the result was worse > code & less reliability. This *was* a system meant to fly. > > Good coders can write good code regardless of language. Language > won't make marginal coders, marginal coding teams, or bad design any > better. You missed his point. The question is not whether language is a replacement for talent, and he did not assert that it was impossible to make high reliability code with anything other than Ada. The question is "for how much money?". His point (if I may be so bold) is that they did it much more economically in Ada. Other have seen these results too. --- Patrick Rogers Consulting and Training in: http://www.classwide.com Real-Time/OO Languages progers@classwide.com Hard Deadline Schedulability Analysis (281)648-3165 Software Fault Tolerance