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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, INVALID_MSGID,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fd6dd,c78177ec2e61f4ac X-Google-Attributes: gidfd6dd,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,c78177ec2e61f4ac X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Matthew S. Whiting" Subject: Re: ada and robots Date: 1997/06/17 Message-ID: <33A7427F.6646@epix.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 249173842 References: <338CDA96.53EA@halcyon.com> <338F5D7D.6C03@tiac.net> <338F9D05.5EB3@bix.com> <5mqpj3$bc5$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <33930245.12A1@sprintmail.com> <5mv984$7kn@news.emi.com> <33A5D644.37A3@epix.net> Organization: epix Internet Services Reply-To: whiting@epix.net Newsgroups: comp.robotics.misc,comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-06-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: I greatly appreciate Jon's rebuttal. He was quite specific and included only minimal name calling. Likewise Robert Duff's comments were fairly much to the point. I'm not sure how to reconcile the disagreement between Jon and Robert with respect to whether 1.5 of the points made were legitimate or not, but this provides a good reason for me to study Ada a little more to make my own judgement. Robert Dewar's complaint of lack of source code equating to lack of specificity is noted, but Jon seemed to have enough detail to provide useful commentary. And the note did include SOME source code! Samuel's sarcasm provides me nothing useful in my ongoing effort to convince my colleague to give Ada a deeper evaluation. Lastly, Stephen's comments are helpful as well. I appreciate the time you all took to respond, especially those with useful responses! I'm not sure which is worse, the ignorance of many C and C++ programmers or the arrogance of many Ada programmers... Matt (a lowly engineering manager trying to get my engineers to use the best available tools and techniques)