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,b30bd69fa8f63cb2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-10 13:32:30 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: jimmaureenrogers@worldnet.att.net (Jim Rogers)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: C bug of the day
Date: 10 Jun 2003 13:32:29 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <82347202.0306101232.16776a81@posting.google.com>
References: <1054751321.434656@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <memo.20030605193115.9141A@brangdon.madasafish.com>
 <d6652001.0306100323.338a2a1c@posting.google.com>
 <bc4n70$fei5u$1@ID-175126.news.dfncis.de>
 <slrnbeboi5.1qc.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.194.156.4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1055277150 2091 127.0.0.1 (10 Jun 2003 20:32:30
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Jun 2003 20:32:30 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38933
Date: 2003-06-10T20:32:30+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Preben Randhol <randhol+abuse@pvv.org> wrote in message news:<slrnbeboi5.1qc.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>...
> Vinzent Hoefler wrote:
> > kanze@gabi-soft.fr wrote:
> > 
> >>  I'd rather have a language
> >>in which all of the defaults were fundamentally safe, but with the
> >>freedom to override them if you had special constraints, or even in
> >>cases where you came across a case which the language authors hadn't
> >>considered.  I don't know such a language, however; it may exist
> >>somewhere, but if it does, it certainly isn't very popular or wide
> >>spread.
> > 
> > And that's been posted to comp.lang.ada? ;-)
> 
> Yes. Only goes to show that there are a lot of people who doesn't know
> that there are better alternatives to C/C++. *sigh*

This is even more disappointing coming from the author (James Kanze).
I have had email conversations with him about Ada. He has heard of Ada.
He has never used Ada. He does not understand what he has been told.

I suppose, if your whole experience is using C and / or C++
you would have a difficult time understanding Ada from a purely
intellectual viewpoint. Some of these understandings must derive from
more visceral experience.

Jim Rogers