Advice on selling Ada to a C shop
in [ADA]
|
From: Ludovic Brenta on 21 Jun 2010 05:58 Maciej Sobczak wrote on comp.lang.ada: > Last but not least - there is a difference between C and C++ and there > is a difference between respective communities as well, even if it's > usually forgotten on this group. If your fellows are "real C > programmes", you're doomed and forget about selling Ada to them - they > will just don't see the point, ever. Just forget. But if they are C++ > programmers and they already understand the importance of large-scale > constructs like namespaces, object-orientation, encapsulation, > abstraction, design patterns, controlled memory usage, and so on, then > this is where you can start your pitch, because they will already > understand what you're talking about and most importantly, they > already feel the need for such things. IMHO, there exists a subset of the "real C programmers" that can be sensitive to the quality afforded by Ada. This is the subset that understands that C is harmful and relies on "coding standards", "language subsets", "lint" and "code review" to reduce the amount of bugs they write. With C, all these tools and techniques are optional, non-standard add-ons to their toolchain. With Ada, they get it for free with the compiler. I like to think that the compiler does a code review every time I compile. In addition, Ada is amenable to even more thorough automatic code checking (see AdaControl, GNAT Checker, CodePeer). -- Ludovic Brenta. "Examples of languages generally recognised to be more suitable than C are Ada and Modula 2. If such languages could be available for a proposed system then their use should be seriously considered in preference to C." MISRA, "Guidelines For The Use Of The C Language In Vehicle Based Software", 1998, Section 1.3.
From: Warren on 21 Jun 2010 09:43 expounded in news:101bf8f3-b823-45ee-9afd-40cbafb4b7a9 @t26g2000prt.googlegroups.com: > I may have the opportunity to pitch Ada for use in some new projects > (industrial equipment) at work. Your situation may be better (industrial equipment) than the one in which I made an attempt. But I think you will face two major challenges: 1. Price tag on Ada development suite (depending upon "equipment" choices) - a management sell. In my case, the idea was considered too "weird" to be taken seriously (in a financial institution). 2. Selling it to the development staff (which you mentioned) To pitch it to management, I think one possibility is to demonstrate it in something inexpensive. I understand that GNAT 2010 will support the AVR suite. So that has almost zero cost if you do a "proof of concept" project. As part of that, perhaps you can organize a pair of "challenge" teams. Have the project well defined and involving concurrency. Measure the progress and success of each team. Selling to the development staff may be a tough sell, outside of the US. If there is a virtually zero job market for Ada, then I've seen developers snub it for that reason alone. If you have that problem, then a favourable management decision might be where your focus should be. ;-) > In the end, it seems, it all comes down to money. Money saved in > greater productivity and less debugging, money saved in lower > liability and maintenance, money gained from satisfied customers who > get a robust product, and maybe even money saved in having programmers > who have a more powerful and safer tool at their disposal. Maybe. I sense that some defence contractors enjoy the followup servicing of bugs, if they can charge for it. ;-) Warren
From: Ludovic Brenta on 21 Jun 2010 09:59 George Orwell wrote: > There are very few companies today, even > software companies, that have not decided bugs, even serious bugs, are just > a fact of life. They accept they're going to anger or even lose some > percent of customers, but this is factored in to their financial > plans. Quality no longer matters, what matters is how much money we can > soak you for this quarter and how long we can get away with it. Good enough > is good enough, and being the best or putting out a product with no known > bugs that can't be circumvented is no longer on radar. It might be possible to turn this argument around. Companies that choose the path of low quality will go bankrupt when other low-quality companies from the Far East under-bid them. Those Far East companies are, in fact, catching up on the quality front. Companies that choose the path of high quality have a chance to survive. This is what Germany does, by tradition. If you buy a car, would you prefer to buy from Germany or from China? If you buy industrial equipment, would you prefer to buy from Germany or from China? If you sell industrial equipment, would you prefer to be Germany or China? -- Ludovic Brenta.
From: Warren on 21 Jun 2010 10:07 Jeffrey R. Carter expounded in news:hvkcf6$auo$1(a)tornado.tornevall.net: > usenet(a)scriptoriumdesigns.com wrote: >> >> So, what points would you emphasize to each (manager, programmers) to >> make the Ada sale? I've read a lot of the advocacy and I think I >> have a fair handle on it, but I'd still like other viewpoints, and >> perhaps even examples of such a successful switch. > > I think there is no way to sell Ada to developers. Ada is a > SW-engineering language; coders don't like it. In my experience, 98% > of developers are coders. SW engineers generally like Ada once they > become aware of it. So if your people are SW engineers, Ada will sell > itself; if they're coders, there's no way to sell it to them. This is why I suggest that they try it with GNAT 2010 with the ATMEGA chips. But even this might be a hard place to start from (learning the Ada language). But if they have Linux and some free time with GNAT first, then an AVR project should not be a big leap from there. If you have to sell the developers, you got to get them to "want" it. They need to sell themselves somehow. That is where a pilot project or proof of concept comes in. Learning Ada is an uphill climb at first and many may only climb it kicking and screaming ;-) If they are to be self taught, then I'd also plan on providing some good texts for them. Warren
From: Warren on 21 Jun 2010 10:23
Peter C. Chapin expounded in news:4c1e0d26$0$2393$4d3efbfe(a)news.sover.net: > Nasser M. Abbasi wrote: > >> Showing examples are one excellent way to illustrate Ada advantage >> over C. > > Putting Ada up against C seems so unfair... like kicking a man when > he's down! A comparison of Ada and C++ seems more appropriate. I > realize that's not what the original poster is talking about. Talking about C++ is only appropriate if these developers already know/use C++ for other projects. Otherwise, it seems to me rather pointless to bring in another variable. But I think one practical selling point, to achieve a "comfort level", is to show them examples of how Ada can interface with C. This way, whether they actually need to call C routines or not, they will have the confort of knowing that they can, with little difficulty. Warren |