TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
"W. Wesley Groleau (Wes)" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
W. Wesley Groleau (Wes)
Fri, 7 Mar 1997 12:03:26 EST
text/plain (23 lines)
:> What might constitute a "software engineering reason" to choose C++ over
:> Ada 95?  I can see COTS, tools, and cheap programmers as reasons, but
:> can't seem to think of a Software Engineering reason.

That's partly the point.  The NRC study, and Mr. Paige's acquiesence*
raises the language decision from being a "Software Engineering" issue
to being one part of the broader decision-making process which _includes_
"COTS, tools, and cheap programmers", etc. as factors to consider.

This makes it much easier for those already so inclined to de-emphasize
reliability, lower defect rates, lower maintenance costs, ....

*acquiescence might be too nice a word.  The announcement as quoted
sounded like the so-called mandate is being completely abandoned, but
the NRC (wait, it wasn't NRC, was it?  Nuclear Reg. Comm.?) study
recommended _keeping_ an Ada mandate for "warfighting software"

W. Wesley Groleau (Wes)                                Office: 219-429-4923
Hughes Defense Communications (MS 10-41)                 Home: 219-471-7206
Fort Wayne,  IN   46808                  (Unix): [log in to unmask]