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=1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!hacgate!gryphon!pnet02!bagpiper From: bagpiper@pnet02.gryphon.com (Michael Hunter) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada vs standard languages / reliability Message-ID: <22013@gryphon.COM> Date: 9 Nov 89 09:40:14 GMT Sender: root@gryphon.COM Organization: People-Net [pnet02], Redondo Beach, CA. List-Id: gateley@m2.csc.ti.com (John Gateley) writes: >I probably shouldn't do this, but here are some nitpicks: >Ada is NOT a much more powerful language than C. Ada has some features >that C doesn't, and C has some features that Ada doesn't and so on. >They are both turing complete (or whatever the phrase is). If you >are going to make such a broad statement, you need to carefully >define what powerful is. Yea...I could write a turing machine in either....in fact you can write a turing machine with gotos, moves, and compares. I don't think I would even be happy with this machine. Mike Hunter - Box's and CPU's from HELL: iapx80[012]86, PR1ME 50 Series, 1750a UUCP: {ames!elroy, }!gryphon!pnet02!bagpiper INET: bagpiper@pnet02.gryphon.com