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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2e91a32061bde112
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Florian Weimer <someone@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>
Subject: Re: JAVA and ADA JGNAT
Date: 2000/01/26
Message-ID: <87zotswmb9.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 578187671
References: <862sv5$sug$1@pirates.Armstrong.EDU>
 <862t3o$9aa1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <86k8r6$alp$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <m3wvoyt4ad.fsf@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no> <86kpbu$aik1@news.cis.okstate.edu>
 <86la8r$519$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <877lgxuquu.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>
 <388EDF67.FA8040A6@maths.unine.ch>
Mail-Copies-To: never
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: abuse@cygnus.argh.org
X-Trace: deneb.cygnus.argh.org 948922378 32709 192.168.1.2 (26 Jan 2000
 21:32:58 GMT)
Organization: Penguin on board
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0804 (Gnus v5.8.4) Emacs/20.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: Florian Weimer <fw@s.netic.de>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 Jan 2000 21:32:58 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-01-26T21:32:58+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> writes:

> > XEmacs (as opposed to Emacs) and Mozilla are among the largest free
> > software projects and are managed in the Bazaar style.
> 
> Good. But does it hold for a compiler, and for a language that should
> care about safety ? 

I don't know.  There is the argument that the more people actively work
with the code, the more bugs are found.  And I think some of the free
*BSD variants have got quite liberal policies regarding CVS access,
but the OS is considered to be extremly stable.

Of course, when it comes to safety-critical software (in the Ada sense),
the synergy effects of the bazaar won't be very effective.  Looking at
code of very different sources, most free software hackers seem to
prefer quick over clean solutions. ;)

> The tolerance towards a browser crashing (for the
> nth time) on a SGI station or the 567th Linux patch is not the same
> as towards code generated by an Ada compiler or the compiler itself.

I don't think that less open (or more closed ;) software development
presults in higher software quality per se.