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,dab7d920e4340f12
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,dab7d920e4340f12
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
From: gaffney@ewirb-wr.robins.af.mil (GAFFNEY.BRIAN)
Subject: Re: Ada is 'better' than C because...
Date: 1996/08/06
Message-ID: <6AUG199622582607@ewirb-wr>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 172620389
distribution: world
sender: gaffney@ewirb-wr (GAFFNEY.BRIAN)
references: <01bb7bf9$b89a1740$96ee6fcf@timhome2>
 <4tj43k$16r@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
 <Pine.GSO.3.92.960804152359.23377C-100000@nunic.nu.edu>
 <320729F1.1ADC@lmtas.lmco.com>
organization: Robins AFB - LNEW
news-software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c
Date: 1996-08-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <320729F1.1ADC@lmtas.lmco.com>, Ken Garlington <garlingtonke@lmtas.lmco.com> writes...
>  http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/docs/reports/cada/cada_art.html
..
>       In this study, the same project done in C and Ada had significantly 
>lower error densities in the C version.
 ^^^^^                        ^
I must have been reading a different article of the same name at the same site,
because I thought the result was just the opposite - C had _higher_ "error
densities" than Ada.