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=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 28 Jul 93 05:49:40 GMT
From: pipex!sunic!news.lth.se!dag@uunet.uu.net  (Dag Bruck)
Subject: Re: Ada is not a failure.
Message-ID: <23541k$jja@nic.lth.se>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In <comp.lang.ada> bwallet@apssgi.nswc.navy.mil (Brad Wallet) writes:
>
>and i am glad...i don't like the idea of trusting my life to a
>program written in c.

You can't be too happy :-)

Now, seriously: I was under the impression that software reliability
in critical applications is primarily governed by the organization of
the software development process, so applications written in assembly
language need not be less safe than those written in Ada (stretching
my case, I know); the main motivation for using Ada is the *cost* of
developing applications with inferior languages.


				-- Dag