TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 03:12:43 +1100
Reply-To: Alan and Carmel Brain <[log in to unmask]>
From: Alan and Carmel Brain <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
MIME-Version: 1.0
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (31 lines)
Roger Racine wrote:


> Instead of finding fault with current practice, and attempting to talk
> engineers into using Ada, I thought it might be better to work on giving
> them what they want -and- what we want.

It might be worth having a look at x/t UML too.

At one stage, we were looking at making an Ada-95 model compiler for
Bridgepoint, but weren't able to raise the funds.

Executable/Translatable UML works very well for rapid development. If
you just had a decent back end that generated reliable and
human-readable code, it would be, if not a silver bullet, pretty darn
close. Having developed a fairly sophisticated air transport logistics
model (tracking every single vehicle, box of rations etc) within 6
weeks, it transformed me from a sceptic to a believer.

URLs:
http://www.softimp.com.au/index.php?id=bridgepoint
http://www.mentor.com/products/embedded_software/nucleus_modeling/index.cfm?redironce=1&

Of course the UML could do with a bit of extra work, strong typing etc
to really get the benefit. But that's another issue.

--
Alan & Carmel Brain
http://aebrain.blogspot.com
mailto:[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2