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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,35b525f397b0e034
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-22 09:06:34 PST
Path: 
 bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!epflnews!masg1.epfl.ch!gasser
From: gasser@masg1.epfl.ch (Laurent Gasser)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Student views on Ada
Date: 22 Sep 1994 15:32:30 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <35s82e$qae@info.epfl.ch>
References: <34kh42$le5@sun24.tfh-berlin.de> <85B31AAE640@annwfn.com>
 <35kapa$1fqc@watnews1.watson.ibm.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: masg43.epfl.ch
Keywords: debugging tools bug-free
Date: 1994-09-22T15:32:30+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In the same vein, you may enjoy reading "Writing Solid Code" at
Microsoft Press.  Yes it is specific to C.  Yes it is edited by
Microsoft and written by one of its member.  But the spirit is quite
sound:

  Every time you find a bug, think about ways you had to catch it in 
  a systematic / automatic way.
  
Reading it is quite instructive.  But I still wonder why C is so
widely used...

In article <35kapa$1fqc@watnews1.watson.ibm.com>, ncohen@watson.ibm.com (Norman H. Cohen) writes:
|> 
|> Being aware that something is wrong when it is called to one's attention
|> is one thing; noticing an error--perhaps a clerical error, perhaps an
|> invalid but seductive line of subtle reasoning--when it's buried in a
|> large and complex program is something else.
|> 
|> Some C programmers, lacking a language that facilitates strong
|> consistency checks, may argue that such checks are for sissies--that Real
|> Programmers do not need them.  However, a compiler that performs strong
|> consistency checks is, like a spelling checker, an important tool for
|> protecting us from our imperfections.  Its use should be a part of the
|> state of the practice for responsible programmers, just as the use of a
|> safety belt is part of the state of the practice for window washers.  To
|> call it a bad habit is to deny that humans make errors.
|> 
|> --
|> Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com

-- 
Laurent Gasser (gasser@dma.epfl.ch)
Computers do not solve problems, they execute solutions.

I know very few ideas worth dying for, none is worth killing.