TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

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

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

Print Reply
"Dale Jr, William" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Dale Jr, William
Wed, 9 Jun 1999 10:25:48 -0700
text/plain (70 lines)
Roger ,

Don't let people  blame the language for two totally different development
processes.  Ada can be used the same why he 'C' project did -- and does so
very neatly with less problems as well.

This is not an 'Ada' issues at all. It is a "process" issue.  If both
processes had used the same language the result would have been the same.

Bill Dale
mailto:[log in to unmask]
mailto:[log in to unmask]

> ----------
> From:         Roger Racine
> Reply To:     Roger Racine
> Sent:         Wednesday, June 9, 1999 08:29
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Anti-Ada Arguments
> I have an interesting anti-Ada argument that I am having difficulty
> refuting.  Any help?
> The argument goes like this:
> -----------------------
> Project A uses Ada.  Project C uses C (use C++ or Java if you like).
> Project A uses good Ada development process and spends a lot of effort up
> front to make sure maintenance will be easy.  Project C starts coding
> immediately, and documents the design "later" (i.e. not at all).
> By the time Project A is ready for a detailed design review, they have
> thousands of pages of design documentation, they have done walkthroughs on
> everything, and they have spent a good deal of money.  By this time,
> Project C has had a number of demonstrations, has a good deal of problem
> reports (due to the usual C pitfalls), and has made a few major design
> changes based on the early demonstrations to the customer.
> At Project A's design review, the customer sees a major problem in the
> basic design.  There were interpretation problems with the requirements.
> The customer says they need the problem fixed.  The developer says: "That
> will cost $10M.  We have to update thousands of pages of documentation, go
> through all those walkthroughs again, etc."
> At Project C's design review, it is less likely that this will happen
> because the customer has been seeing the system being built.  But even if
> a
> major design change is needed, Project C's cost will be much lower to make
> the change.
> -----------------------
> I don't think it is sufficient to simply say "The money will be made up
> during maintenance."  While probably true, the initial cost overrun might
> cause the program to be canceled.  And the total cost, while possibly
> higher for the C case, is likely to be more deterministic (you know how
> many bugs are likely, but it is much more difficult to tell how many major
> design problems will occur).
> Roger Racine
> Draper Laboratory, MS 31
> 555 Technology Sq.
> Cambridge, MA 02139
> 617-258-2489