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: 103376,2702c1ed8be62863 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Pat Rogers" Subject: Re: What ada 83 compiler is *best* Date: 1998/12/08 Message-ID: <74jhct$e2m$1@remarQ.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 420078954 References: <3666F5A4.2CCF6592@maths.unine.ch> <74hk55$6t5$1@remarQ.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@remarQ.com X-Trace: 913131741 Y6JRGRJUHDE30C640C usenet53.supernews.com Organization: Software Arts & Sciences Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-12-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Rick Thorne wrote in message ... >In article <74hk55$6t5$1@remarQ.com>, "Pat Rogers" > wrote: > >> Rick Thorne wrote in message ... >> >> >Ever wonder why the >> >Ada Initiative was dropped by the DoD? The reason is somple: Ada >> code >> >isn't any less expensive, buggy, slow, or difficult to read than >> anyone >> >ELSE's code. >> >> Simply false. See hard facts at: >> >> http://www.adaresource.org/docs/present/ajpo/pll-cost/html/ >> >> http://www.adaresource.org/docs/reports/cada/cada_art.html > >Personally, I think it's cute when someone touts an advocacy web page as >"hard fact." This is like Ralph Reed calling the 0.5% of the American >population who are members of the Christian Coalition "the mainstream", or >the tobacco industry reports refuting the link between smoking and lung >cancer. Honestly, Pat, this kind of logical fallacy is more appropriate >in alt.aliens.visitors. When presented with fact, you spew forth vacuities. Of course the studies are prominently displayed at an advocacy page. That in no way diminishes their content, unless you didn't really bother to read them. If you were as familiar with their content as you purport, you would note that the studies were largely NOT funded by the DoD. This is especially true of the Zeigler C/Ada results (the second URL provided), which has nothing to do with the government whatsoever and shows quantitatively that Ada is more productive than C. I'm not surprised you had difficulty with Ada. It requires thought.