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,c9d5fc258548b22a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 11:27:53 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110123 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How do I write directly to a memory address?
References: 
 <67063a5b-f588-45ea-bf22-ca4ba0196ee6@l11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <iimmvm$tsp$1@news.eternal-september.org> <8r86vgFc3uU1@mid.individual.net>
 <iimrem$udn$1@news.eternal-september.org>
 <19fh1chm74f9.11cws0j5bckze.dlg@40tude.net>
 <fa33fca1-c95b-4558-8a4c-7b3276366ffc@m13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <4d4ff70e$0$6886$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <737a6396-72bd-4a1e-8895-7d50f287960e@d28g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5008a5$0$6879$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <eda00084-fcc3-416c-bd3e-8b9e9c1a4b40@o13g2000yql.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5031fe$0$6765$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <1f229967-d3cf-42b6-8087-c97ee08652f3@i40g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5110ea$0$7669$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <1fb3ce45-ffcc-4c1c-8f76-d151975c8425@x1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <4d511500$0$7665$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <41aaf7bd-8cdc-4538-8158-54368d21882e@f2g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <41aaf7bd-8cdc-4538-8158-54368d21882e@f2g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4d511aa9$0$7653$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 08 Feb 2011 11:27:53 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2546b1fa.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=U0je=ZMLR1Mk:C4l9A;OcOic==]BZ:afN4Fo<]lROoRA<`=YMgDjhgBMBHNc?NkSHNPCY\c7>ejVHK5<5`F_\_8HciX6\`Vo;`B
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16978
Date: 2011-02-08T11:27:53+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2/8/11 11:08 AM, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus wrote on comp.lang.ada:
>> On 2/8/11 10:58 AM, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>>>> (c) by single case logic, Ada's type system has not prevented
>>>> deaths in Ariane 5 anyway.
>>
>>> Huh?
>>
>> You don't even know this?
>
> The problem was the conscious decision not to re-test the Ariane 4
> software against Ariane 5 ....
>
> There were no deaths involved.
>
> So: huh?

See?  You talk about C functions as if there was a general
case: C functions, plural.  Recurring bugs in them, causing
undefined behavior.  I made up the same thing for rocket flights
in general.  The generalizing argument is structurally equivalent!
Both arguments are pointless because people won't listen.
(Watch Sarah P. to see why arguing about foo(int undefined) is
pointless.)

There is a chance of human error (in C, in rockets).
Smart engineers don't make them (in C, in rockets).
C or Ada have had little to do with these  human
errors cause by the wrong assumptions
(about foo() and about Ariane 4 modules).

Here it is, again, my foo() vs Ariane 4/5:

    Construction made by a human, in C,
    knowing how it was going to be used.

    Construction made by a human, in Ada,
    knowing how it was going to be used.

In general, where is the difference?