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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-18 00:48:27 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!tar-alcarin.cbb-automation.DE!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A. Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 09:56:26 +0200 Message-ID: <6roimvg39s8h5ba64u9pn0trsa4d3u4kai@4ax.com> References: <8mgdmv08eaabv53vv5sofud2k40lbo0fdh@4ax.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: tar-alcarin.cbb-automation.de (212.79.194.111) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de 1063871305 29067154 212.79.194.111 (16 [77047]) X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42653 Date: 2003-09-18T09:56:26+02:00 List-Id: On 17 Sep 2003 15:16:40 -0700, aek@vib.usr.pu.ru (Alexander Kopilovitch) wrote: >Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > >> > you can't show an image of good science on movie; common people can't see >> > good science directly, without a mediation of an engineering. > >> Can common people see angels? (well, before they get too much beer) >> Nevertheless, do not even try to attack a religion and its priests? > >First, there was various states of that in different times - just recall how >the Protestant Churches emerged. Second, Christian religion generally accepts >that common people (that is, not priest or monks) can feel God's direct influence >to some degree and in various forms, even in the form of visions. Can't common people perceive scientifical concepts in the form of a vision? So the reason why religion is respected and science is not lies somewhere else than in a possibility to perceive the fruits of both. And fruits of science are far more visible than ones of anything other. >> >> *His* territory is to write the >> >> requrements of *what* the program should do. >> > >> >There may be requirements that aren't in your competence as a contract programmer >> >- for example, perspective for maintenance 5 years ahead... unless your contract >> >explicitly includes your responsibility for that (which is improbable for >> >too small contractors). >> >> Unfortunate example, in 5 years, MS will ship a new version of Visual >> Basic, fully incompatible with the present one. > >I don't know what you call "fully incompatible", "fully incompatible" = not "full compatible" (:-)) > but a typical program in >Visual Basic surely may be converted from old to new compiler without much >effort. And if it appears inconvenient for conversion, it may be simply >rewrote from old source code. No big deal usually, even for average Basic >programmer. Which would be indeed an excellent maintenance perspective ... --- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de