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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,447bd1cf7a88c198 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-02 19:33:54 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!isdnet!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news1.rdc2.on.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3A529C97.2CA4777F@home.com> From: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Do we need "Mission-Critical" software? Was: What to Do? References: <3A4F5A4A.9ABA2C4F@chicagonet.net> <3A4F759E.A7D63F3F@netwood.net> <3A50ABDF.3A8F6C0D@acm.org> <92qdnn$jfg$1@news.huji.ac.il> <3A50C371.8B7B871@home.com> <3A51EC04.91353CE7@uol.com.br> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 03:32:16 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.141.193.52 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news1.rdc2.on.home.com 978492736 24.141.193.52 (Tue, 02 Jan 2001 19:32:16 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 19:32:16 PST Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3602 Date: 2001-01-03T03:32:16+00:00 List-Id: Cesar Scarpini Rabak wrote: > "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" wrote: > [snipped] > > First of all, I like the idea of the book. It should be written. > > A book! Let's start with an article and have it published in Dr. Dobbs's > Mag first! > > just my .019... Articles are also fine ;-) > > (Advocacy mode on..) > [snipped] > > Whereas fine points are brought here, i would like to point that > software security/safety does not come from language but several other > things... I'm not suggesting that the Ada95 language and/or compiler will solve all security problems, or even reliability ones. But it does allow your CPU to point out a lot of very common problems that lead to unreliable and/or insecure programs. If you focus on all other aspects of security, as people do when the write in C/C++/Java for example, then you leave unecessary risks within the system. In a nutshell, Ada95 greatly improves the chances of a program being correct, and less likely to be exploitable. > I counter case, usually used by Ada disgusters is the famous ESA Arianne > rocket, although programmed in Ada it made a very expensive piece of > hardware burn (literally!) due an error in design, notwitstanding the > supposed high quality language (and btw process) to build the softaware. > > Cesar You can never eliminate human error or stupidity completely. I am sure many here on this news group could site "stupid Ada tricks" that are not the fault of the language or its tools, but of those USING the "tool". Kinda like the apprentice mechanic that uses a caliper as a C-clamp. Your example is more the design/human-error type, which again, is not completely avoidable. At least you can say that Ada did exactly as it was told to do, when it burned it's hardware! What more can you ask of a computer? You can't tell HAL to lie. He won't cope with that, no matter what the language used. ;-) -- Warren W. Gay VE3WWG http://members.home.net/ve3wwg