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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,b284f3c6f5dea395 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: l117593@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com (Cordes MJ) Subject: Re: Correction to previous post Date: 1996/04/03 Message-ID: <4ju209$mg4@cliffy.lfwc.lockheed.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 145626260 references: organization: Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-04-03T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar (dewar@cs.nyu.edu) wrote: [snip] : ... I certainly am not aware of any commercial compiler for : Ada, C++, or even C that has been subjected to complete coverage and : path testing (including of course use-def path testing, since that i : is what is involved here). How can we continue to claim that Ada is a better programming language than C++, or even C, if we continue to group Ada with these languages when it is convenient? ;-) Mike ### -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael J Cordes Phone: (817) 935-3823 Fax: (817) 935-3800 EMail: CordesMJ@lfwc.lockheed.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------