TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


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 Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
From: "W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 08:32:35 -0500
Reply-To: "W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (16 lines)
> Our experience (and that of several customers) is that the effort to
> transition for Ada83 to Ada95 is less than effort to port from one C++
> compiler family to another. ....

My experience porting a MegaSLOC, 17,000 file Ada 83 product is that going
from Ada 83 to Ada 95 is not as simple as predicted.  Nevertheless, I
would agree with the above statement.  We had to change less than 318
files--and at least 20% of those werely poorly coded anyway.  (I say less
than, because we took the time to do things right, not merely get them to

But they don't have to look at the long-term stupidity.  In the
short-term, they're talking about throwing away the maintainability
advantages of Ada in exchange for what?  For the HIGH expense of
translating to C++ ?!?!?