home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!fedfil!news
- From: news@fedfil.UUCP (news)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
- Subject: Re: C++ vs. Ada -- Is Ada loosing?
- Message-ID: <172@fedfil.UUCP>
- Date: 13 Dec 92 07:17:14 GMT
- References: <1992Dec4.141816.1@happy.colorado.edu^<11330@prijat.cs.uofs.edu>
- Organization: HTE
- Lines: 33
-
- In article <11330@prijat.cs.uofs.edu>, beidler@guinness.cs.uofs.edu (Jack Beidler) writes:
-
- ^I've enjoyed reading all the postings on why Ada is loosing to C++.
- ^Practically all of the posting are missing the "real" reason. It has
- ^to do with economic considerations (read my company wants to make
- ^more money). Think of it this way: I'm a governement software
- ^contractor. If I build a perfect, or at least a close to perfect
- ^system, I make all my money (read profit) by the time I deliver
- ^the system. However, if I build a buggy system with unreadable
- ^source code, I make money (again read profit) over the entire life
- ^of the software. Since I can build buggier unreadable software in
- ^C and C++, naturally I want to use C and C++ so I can make more
- ^money over a longer period of time.
-
- The more I think about it, Ada (safe, sane....) reminds me of the Volvo.
- You see all those advertisements for Volvos tauting safety features, and
- they never mention the best safety feature, i.e. the fact that they usually
- don't run and you can only hurt yourself so badly sitting under a tree
- in a car.
-
- Likewise with Ada. If you figure all the things which it simply can't do,
- as was so heavily documented in the 700 or so tales of grief from the AdaWoe
- BBS, that really doesn't leave much. Basically, all most people do when forced
- to use Ada in projects is to write some stupid menu system in Ada to call C
- or C++ routines and hope the Ada part doesn't screw the whole thing up
- too badly. That SHOULD be safe...
-
-
-
- --
- Ted Holden
- HTE
-
-
