From: wdm@ecn-pc.UUCP (William D Michael)
Subject: Re: What I miss... (really C, Ada, religion)
Date: Thu, 3-Oct-85 16:14:29 EDT [thread overview]
Date: Thu Oct 3 16:14:29 1985
Message-ID: <393@ecn-pc.UUCP> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 879@lll-crg.UUCP
In article <879@lll-crg.UUCP> brooks@lll-crg.UUCP (Eugene D. Brooks III) writes:
>Could we please keep this discussion in net.ada, net.politics or net.religion.
I disagree, let's keep it here. Sorry, but these issues tie in
very closely to architecture issues.
>
>I subscribed to net.ada for a month a year ago in apology to a ADA nut
>for posting the statement "ADA sucks" to the net. There were a total of two
>articles on net.ada that month, which is proof enough that ADA is a language
>that is devoid if serious use.
The proof you cite seems to be just a bit weak. The thousands of
programmers working with ADA are pretty good proof that it is here to
stay. That doesn't mean you have to like it.
>The only people who like it are those who can't
>manage to write correct programs and need a crutch like subscript checking even
>in a production version of a code.
>
>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!
Right -- soft errors (or hard ones for that matter) never happen once
code reaches production. Not to mention things like tasks over-
writing other tasks data areas and things of that sort. Admittedly,
if these things happen you've got problems, but if I were the captain
of a 747, I would rather have the autopilot tell me to take over because
it detected a non-recoverable error and was shutting down, than
to have it attempt a manuever that would fold the wings like tin foil.
In all seriousness, if you don't have the cycles to do
the things you mention, get a faster processor - it's cheap insurance
against alot of real world perils.
----------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1985-10-03 20:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <796@kuling.UUCP>
[not found] ` <2580002@csd2.UUCP>
[not found] ` <191@graffiti.UUCP>
[not found] ` <568@unisoft.UUCP>
1985-09-29 18:21 ` What I miss... (really C, Ada, religion) Jan Steinman
1985-10-02 1:16 ` Eugene D. Brooks III
1985-10-03 20:14 ` William D Michael [this message]
1985-10-05 19:23 ` DARIN JOHNSON
1985-10-04 13:04 ` Re: What I miss... (really C, Ada, r rosen
1985-10-04 13:44 ` What I miss... (really C, Ada, religion) Jon Mauney
1985-10-05 15:17 ` Swamp Thing
1985-10-05 21:30 ` S.Rajeev
1985-10-06 6:04 ` Jan Steinman
1985-10-07 20:56 ` J. Eric Roskos
1985-10-02 16:04 ` Peter da Silva
1985-10-07 21:04 ` J. Eric Roskos
1985-10-09 18:56 ` Wayne Throop
1985-10-09 23:47 ` Peter Ludemann
1985-09-30 20:00 ` Subscript out-of-bounds detection Joe Orost
1985-10-06 20:54 ` What I miss... (really C, Ada, religion) Eugene D. Brooks III
1985-10-07 14:13 ` Karl Tombre
1985-10-11 12:59 ` J. Eric Roskos
1985-10-13 6:28 ` Barry Margolin
1985-10-16 5:46 ` systolic processor? wildstar
1985-10-21 2:26 ` Re: What I miss... (really C, Ada, religion) Richard Welty
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox