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_20 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 8 Aug 93 17:47:44 GMT
From: alice!bs@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Bjarne Stroustrup)
Subject: Re: Ada and C++: A request for comparison/contrast/relative benifits
Message-ID: <26240@alice.att.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman @ George Washington University) write

 > Let's keep going with facts; flames to /dev/null.

To achieve this lofty goal I think Ada proponents have to avoid a few things
that occur frequently in comp.lang.ada - even in postings from the more sober
members. The most obvious is:

	Don't demonstrate an advantage of Ada over C and from that conclude
	that Ada is therefore superior to C++.

This is an invitation to a counterflame because C++ programmers will interprete
it as either plain ignorance (commonly the real reason) or manipulation by
presentation of selective facts.