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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.70.131.230 with SMTP id op6mr12617734pdb.4.1414684157850; Thu, 30 Oct 2014 08:49:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.18.50 with SMTP id t18mr262697igd.3.1414684157696; Thu, 30 Oct 2014 08:49:17 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!h15no2268905igd.0!news-out.google.com!ks2ni7567igb.0!nntp.google.com!r10no1847574igi.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 08:49:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <50cacb19-5d0b-4dbe-b91b-0b3b462913d6@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=63.80.193.9; posting-account=nD_N8QoAAACgNfe5vMwm0rMAu4pgYumJ NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.80.193.9 References: <220f97ab-9aa2-4961-b140-2b271c3ab99a@googlegroups.com> <99759c3f-a35f-4745-a8fd-2fb6ab6fb1aa@googlegroups.com> <48dc1630-8e7d-4e29-8bdd-53d74932d9d0@googlegroups.com> <88a7f98c-55c2-4b5f-8a9d-c8b7512781c8@googlegroups.com> <50cacb19-5d0b-4dbe-b91b-0b3b462913d6@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <9e6c5556-0454-406e-b49c-d5995934229c@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: F-22 ADA Programming From: Alan Jump Injection-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:49:17 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:22923 Date: 2014-10-30T08:49:16-07:00 List-Id: On Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:38:45 AM UTC-7, Maciej Sobczak wrote: > The difference between Ada and C++ is not that in Ada there will be no bu= gs and in C++ there will be only bugs. At best, the language choice will ha= ve some influence on the probability and economy of failure. So, let's say = (just for the sake of discussion, with no regard to how ridiculous it got a= lready) that with C++ the probability of project failure is 30% and with Ad= a the probability of project failure is 20%. I don't care if these numbers = reflect reality. >=20 > a) And I choose C++. And then shit happens. Am I responsible? To what ext= ent? >=20 > b) And I choose Ada. And then shit happens. Am I responsible? To what ext= ent? >=20 > Are you ready to throw some numbers or can we agree that the discussion w= ent out of control and the whole responsibility argument is just nonsense? As a neophyte student of Ada, I'm quickly learning that Ada really does exa= ctly one thing well: it saves the programmer from committing some simple co= ding errors that would go undetected until runtime under C++. With that said, no language, no matter how carefully crafted or how thoroug= hly validated or formally proven, can save a developer from a poorly-define= d design question, nor the subsequent poorly-designed solution to that prob= lem. If I am presented with a project, "write an application that does this= and that", and I don't do the proper analysis of that project to determine= precisely what's needed, it won't matter if I write the application in Ada= , C++, Python, or Z/80 assembler...it WILL FAIL, because I didn't properly = or adequately define the problem the application is intended to solve. Just my 2p worth. Save up the change for a root beer or something.