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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 10d15b,d730ea9d54f7e063 X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public From: Ken Garlington Subject: Re: C is 'better' than Ada because... Date: 1996/08/19 Message-ID: <32187CF8.72FF@lmtas.lmco.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 175166973 references: <31EA0B65.3EF8@wgs.estec.esa.nl> <31EF7E48.5ABE@lmtas.lmco.com> <4ss8ru$3d4@felix.seas.gwu.edu> <31F28DBD.2A1D@harris.com> <31f3c52e.238719470 <4tnoeh$qjr@maverick.tad.eds.com> <4uj42h$j06@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> <4um1l9$klq@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> <4utuag$ii9@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> <3214B870.19B@tandem.com> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.cobol x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K) Date: 1996-08-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Joe Gwinn wrote: > > But, clearly, if COBOL was DoD-61, there must have been a DoD-1 before > COBOL, so Ada cannot be the first to have been called DoD-1. Given that the revised report was published in '61, I'm not sure why there would have to have been a DoD-1 (1901) preceding it. Clearly, DoD-1 (Ada) should have been DoD-80 or something like that. Of course, you _could_ argue that the designers of Ada were looking forward to 2001... :) -- LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"