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=2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/28/84; site lll-crg.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!brooks
From: brooks@lll-crg.UUCP (Eugene D. Brooks III)
Newsgroups: net.arch,net.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What I miss... (really C, Ada, religion)
Message-ID: <879@lll-crg.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 1-Oct-85 21:16:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: lll-crg.879
Posted: Tue Oct  1 21:16:41 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 4-Oct-85 04:49:49 EDT
References: <796@kuling.UUCP> <2580002@csd2.UUCP> <191@graffiti.UUCP> <568@unisoft.UUCP> <1777@orca.UUCP>
Reply-To: brooks@lll-crg.UUCP (Eugene D. Brooks III)
Organization: Lawrence Livermore Labs, CRG
Xref: watmath net.arch:1846 net.lang.ada:369
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Could we please keep this discussion in net.ada, net.politics or net.religion.

I subscribed to net.ada for a month a year ago in apology to a ADA nut
for posting the statement "ADA sucks" to the net.  There were a total of two
articles on net.ada that month, which is proof enough that ADA is a language
that is devoid if serious use.  The only people who like it are those who can't
manage to write correct programs and need a crutch like subscript checking even
in a production version of a code.

If you program has a proof of correctness, and it checks its input data
properly, it does not need range checks on subscripts.  Such checking only
slows the computer down.  I don't have spare cycles for such a wast of time.
REAL programmers don't need subscript checking, they write lint free code
automatically.  Please leave your ADA hype on net.ada where no one is bothering
to read it!