At 07:27 PM 12/3/02 +0300, Alexandre E. Kopilovitch wrote:
>Peter Amey <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >The most important quality driver in software systems development is domain
>That's true. But Ada insists that domain expertise must be at hand from the
>very beginning of a project, as a prerequisite - that is, Ada do not forgive
>those who need a learning curve in the domain area during the program
>With C/C++ the situation is different - without prior domain expertise (but
>with generally good programmers) you are likely get significant delay of the
>project and uncertain quality of the code, but not an inevitable crash as it
>probably would be with Ada.
> So for those who fear that they can't support the project from its very
>beginning with good domain expertise, the choice in favour of C++ may be
I find it very difficult to understand what you could possibly be talking
about here. I have never heard of any way in which there is less risk with
C++ than with Ada. In all the programs I know about the risk is typically
an order of magnitude higher with C++ than with Ada.
I know of one program that was scrapped several times because they insisted
(each time) on doing it with C/C++. I have never heard of a program that
failed because it was being done in Ada.
Would you care to explain your point?
S. Ron Oliver, the U.S. representative for Top Graph'X, developers of high
quality software components, using Ada, including OrbRiver the
multi-language ORB. A single distributed programming environment for all
developers. Supports Ada95, Java, and C++.
For more information, check out www.topgraphx.com.
Semi-retired professor of Computer Science and Computer