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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,85034d1ac78a66eb X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-11 09:31:09 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!paloalto-snh1.gtei.net!cambridge1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3C8CE9C8.AA0BF9ED@despammed.com> From: Wes Groleau Reply-To: wesgroleau@despammed.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,es-MX,es,pt,fr-CA,fr MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Operating System References: <3c77b476.322111671@news.cis.dfn.de> <3C88E0D1.89161C16@despammed.com> <3C8A3999.2000301@earthlink.net> <3C8B0191.3080705@mail.com> <3C8C3B72.5050107@mail.com> <3C8CC3E9.DA207501@despammed.com> <3C8CCDB0.4010208@mail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 12:30:48 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.168.144.162 X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com X-Trace: dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com 1015867868 151.168.144.162 (Mon, 11 Mar 2002 11:31:08 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 11:31:08 CST Organization: Raytheon Company Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21067 Date: 2002-03-11T12:30:48-05:00 List-Id: Hyman Rosen wrote: > > Wes Groleau wrote: > This is exactly the kind of problem that occurs in MANY environments. > > Of course Ada is not immune to all oversights. It's just immune to > > more of them than most languages. > > You did not respond to my point here. Larry Kilgallen appeared to > be saying that Ada *programmers* were more immune to this kind of > error, either because Ada's checking gave them more time to find > higher-level bugs, or because Ada programmers were of a higher > class. You therefore have illustrated *my* point exactly, that Ada > programmers have made the same oversight that occurs in many other > environments. Wrong. Ada programmers (some of them) are less vulnerable to two categories of bugs: 1. Those that the language prevents. 2. Those that they don't commit because category (1) leaves them with more available brain power. I say "some" because there are the lazy ones who let that freed up brainpower remain idle, but ..... Of course, in the C world, these same lazy ones would not bother to run 'lint' or to proof-read their code. -- Wes Groleau http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau