TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
"S. Ron Oliver" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 3 Oct 2000 01:53:41 +1000
Reply-To:
Alan and Carmel Brain <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Again, Ada is not an option.....
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From:
Alan and Carmel Brain <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines) 
From: "S. Ron Oliver" <[log in to unmask]>

> Fact is, if we assume the code is implemented to meet some reasonable
> degree of quality, in either language, it is fairly easy to show doing it
> in Ada can take as little as one tenth the time it would take to do the
> same quality implementation in C++.

Oh, I agree completely. But how much code in C meets some reasonable
degree of quality before release?

> Moreover, the ongoing maintenance of the C++
> code will be considerably more labor intensify than maintenance of the Ada
> code.  I'm not sure 20 to 1 is the right figure, but it is believable.

The figures were measured values. Which may not be typical, but then again,
may be.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2