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!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!transit3.readnews.com!news-xxxfer.readnews.com!news-out.readnews.com!postnews3.readnews.com!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:17:48 -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>
 <31c357bd-c8dc-4583-a454-86d9c579e5f4@m13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <05a3673e-fb97-449c-94ed-1139eb085c32@x1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <4d4c232a$0$28967$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net> <4D4D6506.50909@obry.net>
 <4d50095f$0$22393$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <wcck4hb95jz.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <4d6d56c4$0$11509$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <16u9ka51wbukr$.1fj2sb73j9rv6.dlg@40tude.net>
In-Reply-To: <16u9ka51wbukr$.1fj2sb73j9rv6.dlg@40tude.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4d6d627b$0$11509$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: e6614d22.usenet-news.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=W4@^FS0YRDgI:Vl`6W=:Wm^oXGM_6\KV`mX0AG3X_jUobO=B]JiG>>mVjKk:Lk^BNacR12TN^Bg7nO6DZ1OMjcHkE2TC\hF^UYg
X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenet-news.net
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:18669
Date: 2011-03-01T16:17:48-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 3/1/2011 3:47 PM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> It should serve as a caution against deploying damaging, unsafe and often
> useless technologies like RDBMS. There should be no such thing (there
> definitely exist better approaches to persistence) and no languages like
> SQL.

Hmm. The whole world uses C and C++, but that's bad. The whole world
uses relational databases and that's bad too. Yet somehow the whole
world seems to get along. Maybe it's just you.

> No, Ada is immune exactly to this class of errors, which arise from
> unnecessary type conversions.

Except that this error has nothing to do with "unnecessary" type
conversions. It is a plain old error due to a failure to distinguish
between a string being interpolated into an SQL statement and a
string being passed to be bound to an SQL statement parameter.

And this is an Ada interface to SQL maintained by the same people
who maintain the GNAT compiler. If they're providing interfaces
with "unnecessary type conversions" that cause errors, why should
anyone believe that programming in Ada is the wonderful thing that
it's proponents claim?