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-Thread: 103376,f2690a5e963b61b6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsread.com!news-xfer.newsread.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!noris.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.arcor.de!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 12:40:57 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>
Organization: future apps GmbH
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050513 Debian/1.7.8-1
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GCC 4.0 Ada.Containers Cursor danger.
References: <1120474891.635131.216700@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1120575076.876798.108220@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1120583470.429264.325450@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <dafrj4$n4i$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
   <uk6k42wvf.fsf@obry.net>
   <1120639461.224146.235430@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <uvf3ob91o.fsf@obry.net>
   <1120642489.101644.74190@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
   <umzp0b790.fsf@obry.net>
 <1120643138.031761.212450@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <1120643138.031761.212450@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <42cbb52c$0$10807$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 06 Jul 2005 12:40:44 MEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 0c07c7cb.newsread4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=m:M\gFDbD<=3JZ<GaG=_E2:ejgIfPPld4jW\KbG]kaM8liQbn6H@_E9MTcb`V44<L<UUng9_FXZ=3>:=P9Ihe`B8@Z?dZ]MOid5
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11891
Date: 2005-07-06T12:40:44+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitriy Anisimkov wrote:
> What is closer to Ada ideology versatility or safety ?
> 
Well, both of course, how else could you write
versatile real-time programs which have to be safe?