From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_DATE, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!cernvax!chx400!bernina!iis!neeri From: neeri@iis.ethz.ch (Matthias Ulrich Neeracher) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: "Ada and C++", from comp.software-eng Message-ID: <1991Apr30.165320.3833@bernina.ethz.ch> Date: 30 Apr 91 16:53:20 GMT References: <5148@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> Sender: neeri@iis (Matthias Ulrich Neeracher) Reply-To: neeri@iis.ethz.ch (Matthias Ulrich Neeracher) Organization: Integrated Systems Laboratory, ETH, Zurich Nntp-Posting-Host: etzj-gw List-Id: In article <5148@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>, abdlm@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov writes: >Wasn't this the system (or one similar to it) that took out the whole east >coast of the U.S. with a pointer bug last year. Chalk up another victory for >the power of pointers and C++. With so much of the world economy riding on >the telecomunications networks, wouldn't it make sense to build these >systems with tools (read languages) that were designed for reals time systems. Are you implying that Ada programs are absolutely bug-free ? It seems to me that these telecommunications applications have quite few failures. >Any cost sagings AT&T realized by using their in house language (C++,C) which >might or might not be faster than Ada were probably lost in the first few hours >of the service outage. That was an expensive lesson. So what exactly was the lesson ? That real systems, as opposed to their specifications and their vaporware counterparts, sometimes fail ? >-D. Miller, Goddard robotics Laboratory. Matthias -- Matthias Neeracher neeri@iis.ethz.ch "These days, though, you have to be pretty technical before you can even aspire to crudeness." -- William Gibson, _Johnny Mnemonic_