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=0.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 28 Aug 91 12:55:48 GMT
From: dtix!oasys!depriest@mimsy.umd.edu  (Mike DePriest)
Subject: Re: Critique of Mosemann studies
Message-ID: <10427@oasys.dt.navy.mil>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In comp.lang.ada, srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) writes:
>      I am preparing a critique of the Mosemann studies on Ada and C++
>(unfortunately without seeing the text, just comments).  Before I post the
>critique to the net, I wouldn't mind a few reviews.  Anyone interested in
>taking a look, please email your address to me, and I'll send the critique.

Isn't it a little premature to critique something you haven't read? I haven't
read the Mosemann study either, so I don't feel qualified to comment on it.

IMNSHO, this is akin to writing a critique of a film based on what Rex Reed,
Gene Shalit, and USA Today said about it in their reviews. Funny thing, there
are a lot of movies that have no critical appeal are very popular and 
economically satisfying, while the movies that critics like are often
box-office duds.

If you're only looking to pour gasoline on a burning fire, this will be a great
way to do it - just be ready to defend yourself against the inevitable flames.

BTW, I won't read your critique - I'll judge it by the comments here. ;-)

>Gregory Aharonian
>Source Translation & Optimization
>srctran@world.std.com

-- Mike DePriest * Ada: It's the law.  *   package OPINIONS is
-- Naval Aviation Depot Jacksonville   *     STANDARD : DISCLAIMER_TYPE;
-- (904) 772-4895 (DSN) 942-4895       *     procedure disavow_culpability;
-- depriest@oasys.dt.navy.mil          *   end OPINIONS;