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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,abd508cccb4803ea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-19 09:14:27 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: mjsilva697@earthlink.net (Mike Silva) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: C.A.R. Hoare on liability Date: 19 Jun 2002 09:14:25 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <27085883.0206190814.67fc4825@posting.google.com> References: <3D0E09BA.A492AA3D@despammed.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.245.217.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1024503266 23924 127.0.0.1 (19 Jun 2002 16:14:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Jun 2002 16:14:26 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26391 Date: 2002-06-19T16:14:26+00:00 List-Id: Wes Groleau wrote in message news:<3D0E09BA.A492AA3D@despammed.com>... > Tying together two recent threads, > a quote from "The Emperor's Old Clothes": > > ... we asked our customers whether they wished us > to provide an option to switch off these checks > in the interests of efficiency on production runs. > Unanimously, they urged us not to--they already knew > how frequently subscript errors occur on production > runs where failure to detect them would be disastrous. > I note with fear and horror that even in 1980, language > designers and users ahve not learned this lesson. I sure don't understand this part. It sounds as if "our customers" were saying that, yes, we know how important it is to have checks turned on even in production code, but, notwithstanding that knowledge, we simply can't be trusted to leave them on ourselves, and so we must be forced by the compiler to keep them turned on. Very odd! > In any respectable branch of engineering, failure > to observe such elementary precautions would have > long been against the law. Yep!