The commenter argues that, in the above-titled paper by P.V. Bhansali (see ibid., vol.79, p.22-29, 1991): (a) data reported to be supported by a footnoted reference are not in the referenced article; (b) data in a referenced article that are at variance with the conclusions reached in the paper were not included; and (c) when these data are included, the conclusions reached concerning Ada productivity are not supported by the facts. Bhansali replies that the main objective of conducting the cost/benefit analysis was to come up with a parametric model so that individual organizations can utilize their data and determine the effectiveness of using Ada. The most difficult part of conducting the cost analysis was obtaining consistent data. Because of data limitations the conclusions was equivocal: Ada could represent a potential savings over the entire life-cycle.>

This paper describes the status of software quality assurance as a relatively new and autonomous field. The history of its development from hardware quality assurance programs is discussed, current methods are reviewed, and future directions are indicated.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the efforts aimed at producing a Standard for Software Quality Assurance Plans.