TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


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
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
"Paul D. Stachour" <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 13 Oct 1998 22:20:15 -0500
<[log in to unmask]> from "W. Wesley Groleau x4923" at Oct 13, 98 09:27:42 am
"Paul D. Stachour" <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (32 lines)
> Karl N., quoting from a leter in CrossTalk:
> >         In a comparative study of ... (Ada 83, Ada95, C, C++, Objective C,
> >         PL/I, Assembler, CHILL, Pascal and Smalltalk), ...
> >         ... the lowest cost and fewest defects were found in
> >         Smalltalk and Ada95, ....  Function points correctly identified
> >         Smalltalk and Ada95 as being superior, but [SLOC did not].
> >
> >         Capers Jones
> >         Software Productivity Research
>                                     ^^
> I'd really like to see the full details on that study.  My CrossTalk
> hasn't arrived yet, but I suppose the letter didn't say much more.
>    ...
> The reason for this rambling introduction is the fact that Ada's current
> main competition, Java, is not in the quote above.  In the comparison,
> Jones (or SPR) rates Ada 95 at 6.5, Smalltalk at 15.0, and Java at 6.0.
> (C at 2.5 and C++ at 6.0)
That's right.  So, we don't know for Java.  We do know for C++.
The point is that there is *GOOD DATA* that says that Ada is good.
Java may be good also, but we don't know yet.

Would you prefer to place your bets with something that is known
to be good, or something that is an unknown?  It depends, but my bais
is towards that which is known to be good.