Productivity and error rates for Ada projects
Bill Wolfe
wtwolfe at hubcap.clemson.edu
Sun Mar 4 04:01:35 AEST 1990
From the November 1988 issue of IEEE Software, page 89 ("Large
Ada Projects Show Productivity Gains"): Productivity ranged
from 550 to 704 lines per staff-month at the 1.2-million-line
level -- a sharp contrast with the average productivity of the
1,500 systems in productivity consultant Lawrence Putnam's
database: only 77 lines per staff-month. Reuseable software
developed on the project was counted only once, and reuseable
software not developed on the project was not counted at all.
Excerpts from a recent NASA internal study were recently
published in the September/October 1989 SIGAda Ada Letters
(page 58): by the third Ada project, 42% of code was reused,
productivity was 33.9 noncomment lines per staff-day (that's
746 lines per staff-month), and there were only 1.0 defects per
thousand lines of code. The study recommended that NASA should
adopt Ada as its standard programming language.
Does anyone know of any empirical results regarding the level of
productivity and defect rate associated with C-language projects?
It would be interesting to compare them to the results cited above.
Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe at hubcap.clemson.edu
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list