From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 07:08:46 PDT From: John_A_Kostecki.Wbst129ul@xerox.com Subject: Re: INFO-ADA Digest V92 #56 (Re: Why Ada) Message-ID: <"13-Apr-92 10:08:46 EDT".*.John_A_Kostecki.Wbst129ul@Xerox.com> List-Id: Folks, You know, this whole discussion of whether Ada is "good" or not (and concurrent discussions of Ted Holden) are somewhat useless. I don't think that we will ever convince poor Ted that Ada has a usefulness in the world. I don't think we need to. I have worked in both Ada and C environments and most of the problems were just bad engineering, not a nuance of the language. I have tended to react to this argument in the same way that I reacted the first time I walked into my horse's stall: first I was offended by the smell; but then later on, I just ignored all the stuff, because I understood the source of the inconvenience. Regards, John P.S.: We have opted for C++ instead of Ada because someone said that you could write "elegant" code in C. I love these technically decided issues.