TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
From: "S. Ron Oliver" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 07:29:06 -0600
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Reply-To: "S. Ron Oliver" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (25 lines)
Thank you, Pat.  You beat me to the punch.

At 07:28 AM 10/2/00 -0500, Pat Rogers wrote:
>No, no, no!  This idea that it generally/usually/always takes longer to
>develop the initial product in Ada -- i.e. that productivity is lower in
>Ada -- must not continue to be promulgated!   Experienced Ada people can blow
>away the competition in productivity.


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++.  And I believe one third the time is by
far the worst likely case.  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.

sro

S. Ron Oliver, semi-retired professor of Computer Science and Computer
Engineering.  www.csc.calpoly.edu/~sroliver

Tire of sucky software! ?  Check out www.caressCorp.com and follow the
links to software sucks and The Oliver Academy.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2