Re: Ada ad in Embedded Systems Programming stinks

[bjw@f111.iassf.easams.com.au (Brendan WALKER)]

In article <DAG.94Sep8090447@bellman.control.lth.se>,
Dag Bruck <dag@control.lth.se> wrote:
>>>>>> "RE" == Robert I Eachus <eachus@spectre.mitre.org> writes:
>
>RE> Most Ada avocates, myself included, read, understand, and even use
>RE> C where appropriate.  We do not treat C programmers as heretics,
>RE> we regard those who speak only C illiterate.
>
  [stuff deleted]

>I digress; I would instead point out that there are significant
>differences between C and C++, and several postings on comp.lang.ada
>do C++ unjustice by taking problems in C and transfering them to C++.
>
>First, there are several areas where checking in C++ is tighter than
>in C, for example:
>
	[deleted features of C++ in addition to C]

>RE>     Passing an object instead of a pointer to it (the earlier
>RE> example) is a difference between Ada and C.
>
>As described above, this is a case where C++ should appeal more than C
>to the Ada programmer.
>
>Finally a comment on the Ada/C/C++ "language wars:" I think the issue
>is to use C++ instead of C, not to use C++ instead of Ada, at least
>for the great majority of programmers.
>
>
>					-- Dag Bruck, C++ fan

This is a good opportunity for some opinion from "down under". On the
project I am currently working on we did see our choice as being between
C++ or Ada. C was never considered. For general information, I will outline
the main reasons why we chose C++ over Ada:

	- Use of GNU C++ Compiler coupled with Signus support contract
	  was MUCH cheaper than purchase of multiple Ada compiler
	  licences. We needed to distribute licences to many different
	  machines, sites, and sub-contractors.

	- Price and availability of a wide range of proven development
	  tools for C++ vs Ada. Especially in the area of GUI and
	  other rapid prototyping tools.

	- Object Oriented Programming features of C++ over Ada-83, (9X was
	  still twinkling in peoples eyes when we had to make our decision).

	- Ease of implementing low-level device driver and UNIX/VX-Works
	  compatible Comms software with C syntax over Ada.

Our project is a distributed 68040/VME and HP-Work Station based system
that is being produced under contract to the Royal Australian Air Force.

Note that most of the Engineers on the project have Ada backgrounds, with
maybe a little C. We have found over-all that former Ada Software Engineers
design and write excellent C++ software.

Coming from an Ada background myself, I can add that I personally prefer
C++ over Ada-83 in many ways, but particularily due to the extra dimension
that the OOP features add to my ability to produce elegant designs and
implementations. I suggest that the C++ critics actually give it a try....

In terms of tools and support (compiler bug fixes etc), down here the GNU
C++/Signus compination is miles ahead of the Ada competition. The last Ada
project I worked on here was stricken by a terribly slow and buggy
compiler, a primitive tool-set, and an absolutely shocking level of 
support from the US-based compiler vendor, who shall remain nameless,
suffice to say that they were one of the "biggies".

The jury is still out until we finish our current project, but so far
it looks as if C++ is here to stay in our organisation.

PS: We do NOT have an Ada mandate from our DoD in Australia, but on
some defence projects in the past Ada has been specified. This practice
is now almost extinct.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
Brendan Walker		| The opinions expressed above are obviously
IASSF Project, 		| the ramblings of a troubled mind, and 
EASAMS (Australia)	| therefore not those of my employer.