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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1014db,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: rorou@itfhps00.itf.hcsd.ca (Richard O'Rourke) Subject: Re: C is 'better' than Ada because... Date: 1996/07/19 Message-ID: <4sopkp$dao@itfhps00.itf.hcsd.ca>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 168908697 references: <31daad10.57288085@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> <31ebfbd7.330061022@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> <31EE19D1.6977@lfwc.lockheed.com> <31efe069.63062188@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> organization: Hughes Aircraft of Canada reply-to: rorou@dev.hcsd.hac.ca newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c Date: 1996-07-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <31efe069.63062188@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov>, Kevin D. Quitt wrote: >On Thu, 18 Jul 1996 11:02:41 +0000, Ken Garlington > wrote: <> >>failures" (e.g., exceptions) to quiet ones (subtle and random output >>differences) for "sloppy" code that has invalid pointer references, etc. >>True? > >Essentially, yes. I prefer an environment that doesn't make it easy for code >to work by accident. > AHA! Exactly what Ada gives you and C does NOT!. >-- >#include http://emoryi.jpl.nasa.gov/ > _ >Kevin D Quitt USA 91351-4454 96.37% of all statistics are made up >Per the FCA, this email address may not be added to any commercial mail list -- Richard O'Rourke rorou@dev.hcsd.hac.ca -- -- Richard O'Rourke rorou@dev.hcsd.hac.ca