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=1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,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: 103376,349657f8b72f2411
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: SpamSpamSpam <spam@spam.com>
Subject: Re: Where's Ada95 when OO languages are discussed?
Date: 1999/03/24
Message-ID: <36F8A397.32BC883F@spam.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 458308862
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <7d8ik6$s6d$1@its.hooked.net> <36F7F02E.BC57F7CB@aasaa.ofe.org>
 <87emmfpw3t.fsf@mihalis.ix.netcom.com> <36F837D3.3F7227FA@aasaa.ofe.org>
 <877ls7porm.fsf@mihalis.ix.netcom.com>
 <dale-2403991536470001@dale.bu.cs.rmit.edu.au>
 <873e2vpfs1.fsf@mihalis.ix.netcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: spameater
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: spamwithchipsplease@spam.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-03-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Chris Morgan wrote:

> > However we all agree that it is better termed "urban myth", and I think
> > this is what David Starner was trying to imply.
> >
> > Please don't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the
> > message.
>
> Point taken, but most serious programmers I've met don't think these
> things.

"most serious programmers I'm met" is as much hearsay as the "common
knowledge
"comment you jumped on.  The "please supply reference" argument is employed
too often
on CLA. The thread you high jacked offered reasons why Ada remains a minority
language.
The posters were quite clear to distinguish "fact" from "opinion". Usenets
for opinion, if you want
fact, or if you can't stand a differing opinion without jumping down
someone's neck, stick to
your reference books.

BTW, I've meet quite a few Ada programmers who believe the "urban myth", and
most of them
are so serious its scary.