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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	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: 
 g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!198.186.194.249.MISMATCH!transit3.readnews.com!news-out.readnews.com!postnews3.readnews.com!not-for-mail
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 13:31:38 -0500
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
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>
 <4d52ee47$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <e1076cab-2a7e-4762-acf4-80bf807614bf@n16g2000prc.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5306a0$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <76c123ab-7425-44d8-b26d-b2b41a9aa42b@o7g2000prn.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5310ab$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <9bff52ca-6213-41da-8fa4-3a4cdd8086d3@y36g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5315c8$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <159dca70-2103-46d7-beb2-c7754d30fe36@k15g2000prk.googlegroups.com>
 <4d53222d$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <bc7802fb-0184-437b-b0fa-9ba0ff260c04@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
 <4d540714$0$27423$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <e491f5ad-ae17-42fd-9412-f457d32ac217@q2g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5423b9$0$27423$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <867afa64-090f-48bf-93a3-54ec23b51381@f18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
 <4d555f9a$0$27376$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <1sfshkbj9yjb8.ois7uj3gbxw7.dlg@40tude.net>
In-Reply-To: <1sfshkbj9yjb8.ois7uj3gbxw7.dlg@40tude.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4d558091$0$27376$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 1da5c17a.usenet-news.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=o=B;Gj>:5JLfDl]ba^4dUE^oXGM_6\KV@mX0AG3X_jUOWonLZPGF:dMVjKk:Lk^BNAcR12TN^Bg7NL=<PNCjPL;AOb:Tjk=RUdD
X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenet-news.net
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:18213
Date: 2011-02-11T13:31:38-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2/11/2011 1:04 PM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>> You might also ask yourself why, if Ada is so good, is it so
>> little used?
>
> Because code quality has negative value. Anybody delivering quality code
> (no matter in which language) will suffer economically.
>
> The reason for this was already discussed by us. The expenses and risks are
> not covered by the price of software.

But software developers have switched to languages which
they believe will improve what they produce; C++, Java,
and C# have all become popular. No one switched to those
languages with the goal of producing poorer software.

Perhaps what you believe to be quality and how to achieve
it is incorrect? The cell phone in my pocket is a miracle.
It performs wonders beyond the wildest science-fictional
fantasies dreamed of a few decades ago. Its code is written
in C and C++ and Java. If we can have such features with
allegedly low-quality software, why indeed should anyone
believe that higher quality is needed or possible?