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: 103376,5ecb5248e650e812 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Dale Stanbrough Subject: Re: Ada and robots Date: 1997/06/25 Message-ID: <5os8ua$ndn$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 252612180 Distribution: world References: <9706242128.AA09652@stealth.ctron.com> X-XXMessage-ID: Organization: RMIT, Melbourne, Australia Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-06-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Huy Vo writes: "On the contrary, C constitutes the low level base for Ada programs, the work horse, the "unsafe" layer (NT, UNIX, LINUX, etc...) without which it's impossible to build "safe" applications. The lack of high level abstraction doesn't hurt C a bit. C provides me with every component that made this post possible: the editor, the operating system, the networking software/firmware. I don't believe in C because everyone (well, almost) writes in C; I believe in C because it works just fine for me." Perhaps you should look at a Comms. of the ACM article in which standard Unix utilities such were fed a series of random characters as a test. Many of them core dumped. We can't infer that just because something is being used all the time, and that it is written in a particular language, that therefore that language is intrinsically good. Dale