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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.43.97.66 with SMTP id cj2mr28565421icc.8.1414966994669; Sun, 02 Nov 2014 14:23:14 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.140.20.175 with SMTP id 44mr649037qgj.4.1414966994638; Sun, 02 Nov 2014 14:23:14 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!h15no4374606igd.0!news-out.google.com!u5ni17qab.1!nntp.google.com!u7no1982382qaz.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 14:23:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=213.108.152.51; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.108.152.51 References: <220f97ab-9aa2-4961-b140-2b271c3ab99a@googlegroups.com> <99759c3f-a35f-4745-a8fd-2fb6ab6fb1aa@googlegroups.com> <48dc1630-8e7d-4e29-8bdd-53d74932d9d0@googlegroups.com> <88a7f98c-55c2-4b5f-8a9d-c8b7512781c8@googlegroups.com> <50cacb19-5d0b-4dbe-b91b-0b3b462913d6@googlegroups.com> <07d0ad94-160b-4873-ba1b-403e8c0bc420@googlegroups.com> <8100a013-e50d-4a19-b506-716288a2ccb4@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <1c2c4aa0-9a0d-4906-b77e-79f2c3e27362@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: F-22 ADA Programming From: Maciej Sobczak Injection-Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2014 22:23:14 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:22981 Date: 2014-11-02T14:23:14-08:00 List-Id: > You are a master at living with and promoting failure as a lifestyle. I did not promote failure in any of my previous posts, so your statement is= misplaced. Still, I find it telling and that you have switched to ad-homin= em arguments, as it shows that you are running out of technical ones. > The OpenBSD project got sick enough to throw out OpenSSL and > replace it and with their new 5.6 release have shipped their own modifica= tions. > The work will be ongoing until all the problems in OpenSSL have been gutt= ed and reworked. Excellent. This is exactly what should happen and I applaud it (which falsi= fies your imagination of my lifestyle). So what is the language that they have used for implementing their "modific= ations"? > Engineering ethics have to be made part of an > education.=20 Great idea, I'm all for it. On this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering the word "economy" is found in 9 places, every time as a component that is = as important as "science". One example is this: "Engineers use their knowledge of science, mathematics, logic, economics, a= nd appropriate experience or tacit knowledge to find suitable solutions to = a problem." You cannot build any "engineering ethic" construction with any one of these= components removed. Economy is part of the equation whether you like it or= not. I have already given an example of buying a car. There is a lot of et= hics implied in it, but it cannot be done without economy in mind. The same= applies to programming, too. > But you do need to get rid of C and C++ because their culture is > broken. The C++ culture is now exploring Mars. I find this "culture" pretty convinc= ing. > They value ease of implementation over correctness. The correctness is heavily impaired if the ease of implementation is not en= couraged. All safety standards that I'm aware of encourage solutions that a= re easy to implement (see also the "logic" part of the engineering descript= ion above). > They value > running on everything Portability seems to be a valid engineering goal. > with a battery No. This is Python's domain. C and C++ are relatively naked. > more important than doing whatever it > is they're supposed to do well. I'm not sure if difficult to implement and not working on existing hardware= could be counted as "doing well". > That culture has to go. It's not going anywhere. > Java is not pretty but it's still a lot safer than C or C++. Java introduces more problems than it solves - that's why C++ is now on Mar= s while Java had to stay on Earth. And that's also why you can find C++ in = safety-related deployments (to the highest levels of criticality), whereas = you are not likely to find Java there anytime soon. Unless you want failure to be part of your lifestyle... Actually, as I have already written in a similar discussion here some time = ago, it is not C++ which is a biggest enemy of Ada (believe it or not, C++ = programmers are the only ones who are likely to become Ada recruits) - the = biggest and most dangerous enemy of Ada is Java, which makes Ada and C++ lo= ok like close friends. And the only way for Ada to survive is to stop blind= ly fighting with C++, as the reasons to fight are no longer valid today. Th= is is the part that you seem to be missing. --=20 Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com