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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site gypsy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!siemens!gypsy!rosen
From: rosen@gypsy.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Re: What I miss... (really C, Ada, r
Message-ID: <38000024@gypsy.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 4-Oct-85 09:04:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: gypsy.38000024
Posted: Fri Oct  4 09:04:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 5-Oct-85 07:17:49 EDT
References: <879@lll-crg.UUCP>
Nf-ID: #R:lll-crg:-87900:gypsy:38000024:000:1062
Nf-From: gypsy!rosen    Oct  4 09:04:00 1985
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


> Re: Range checks in Ada
> 
> If you program has a proof of correctness, and it checks its input data
> properly, it does not need range checks on subscripts.  Such checking only
> slows the computer down.  I don't have spare cycles for such a wast of time.
> REAL programmers don't need subscript checking, they write lint free code
> automatically.  Please leave your ADA hype on net.ada where no one is
> bothering to read it!
>

Don't need runtime checks in your production quality Ada code?  Hmm, 'pragma
SUPPRESS' (alias runtime accelerator) ought to do it.  Go ahead, you can
scan through your 'C' code and remove all of the range checking statements;
I'll just add a few of these pragmas where I see fit.  Those of us in the
Ada community recognize a 'C' mentallity when we see it.  Why don't you keep
your 'C' rhetoric in 'net.lang.c.braindamage'?  This flame has been recorded.

------------
Steve Rosen
Siemens Research and Technology Laboratories
Princeton, NJ

USENET: {ihnp4|princeton|adrvax}!siemens!gypsy!rosen
ARPA:   siemens!gypsy!rosen@TOPAZ