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=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 9 Jul 93 16:52:29 GMT From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!csc.ti.com !tilde.csc.ti.com!mksol!mccall@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (fred j mccall 575-3539) Subject: Re: Why soldiers are afraid of Ada Message-ID: <1993Jul9.165229.10547@mksol.dseg.ti.com> List-Id: In <1993Jul8.201353.19685@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Cobarruvias@asd2.jsc.nasa.gov (John Cobarruvias) writes: >But to say the Armed Forces as a >whole is afraid of Ada is just plain Frickin crap. As are the sort of personal attacks levelled by Mr Crook. If this is the best 'defense' of Ada against its critics that its proponents can mount (and it certainly ought not to be), then I would have to submit that that is prima facie proof that the critics are correct. Language wars are stupid. Personal attacks because you disagree with someone's viewpoint are stupid. Both seem to rear their heads here periodically. If you want 'sour grapes', examine the attitude of some (note, *some*) members of the Ada community toward C++ (and the commercial success it has enjoyed, while Ada has not). Now, can we all get back to discussing Ada? Attacks on critics of Ada and on other languages don't do anything to promote Ada. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.