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=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	PLING_QUERY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9c6cb042c6c5955f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dweller@dfw.net (David Weller)
Subject: Re: Does Ada95 beat FORTRAN?!?
Date: 1996/04/22
Message-ID: <4lfqqa$lku@dfw.dfw.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 150802536
references: <00001a73+00002ce8@msn.com> <317906B6.42853EF6@cpmx.saic.com>
 <dewar.830136560@schonberg>
organization: DFWNet -- Public Internet Access
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-04-22T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <dewar.830136560@schonberg>, Robert Dewar <dewar@cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
>Here is one respect in which Ada 95 is clearly superior to Fortran
>for numerical applications. In Ada 95, there are accuracy requirements
				^^^^^^
>for the trig functions, there are no such requirements in Ada 95.
>							   ^^^^^^

Um, Robert, your Freudian slip is showing :-)



-- 
    Visit the Ada 95 Booch Components Homepage: www.ocsystems.com/booch
           This is not your father's Ada -- lglwww.epfl.ch/Ada