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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f039470e8f537101
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-23 22:16:28 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: snarflemike@yahoo.com (Mike Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ariane5 FAQ
Date: 23 Jul 2003 22:16:27 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <20619edc.0307232116.26a409d5@posting.google.com>
References: <mailman.26.1058753354.24167.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <bfhaed$e786b$1@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <1058813341.841940@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <bfhe55$eqglr$1@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <1058816605.566685@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <bfhjjr$eftm1$1@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <AY0Ta.14787$0F4.7550@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
 <PmiTa.119324$ye4.85458@sccrnsc01> <1058969472.350716@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <20619edc.0307231233.24f27e91@posting.google.com>
 <1058996131.223000@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.247.220.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1059023788 27500 127.0.0.1 (24 Jul 2003 05:16:28
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Jul 2003 05:16:28 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:40748
Date: 2003-07-24T05:16:28+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote in message news:<1058996131.223000@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>...
> Mike Silva wrote:
> > So you are arguing that, lacking written documentation to the
> > contrary, any piece of code should be assumed capable of handling all
> > possible input values in a way that is appropriate to all possible
> > systems in which the code is employed.  Tell me, honestly, would you
> > fly in a rocket designed under such assumptions?
> 
> But we're not talking about "any-all". This was a combined
> hardware and software module being moved from one rocket
> version to the next.

Rocket versions are almost certainly "all possible systems in which
the code is employed."  Change it to "all possible systems in which
the subsystem is employed" if you want.  You are still demanding that
the Ariane-4 people look into the future, rather than demanding that
the Ariane-5 people look into the past.