Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | W. Wesley Groleau (Wes) |
Date: | Fri, 7 Mar 1997 12:03:26 EST |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
:> 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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|