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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, FREEMAIL_REPLY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-10 10:35:22 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: softeng3456@netscape.net (soft-eng) Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: Using Ada for device drivers? (Was: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died) Date: 10 May 2003 10:35:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <9fa75d42.0305100935.6fa9ee2a@posting.google.com> References: <9fa75d42.0304230424.10612b1a@posting.google.com> <416273D61ACF7FEF.82C1D1AC17296926.FF0BFD4934A03813@lp.airnews.net> <9fa75d42.0305010621.55e99deb@posting.google.com> <17cd177c.0305011129.2eab5fb8@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0305090536.49431321@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.243.127.233 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1052588122 27819 127.0.0.1 (10 May 2003 17:35:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 May 2003 17:35:22 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:63499 comp.object:63172 comp.lang.ada:37154 misc.misc:14075 Date: 2003-05-10T17:35:22+00:00 List-Id: Preben Randhol wrote in message news:... > soft-eng wrote: > > gautier_niouzes@hotmail.com (Gautier) wrote in message news:<17cd177c.0305011129.2eab5fb8@posting.google.com>... > > > >> You simply ignore the huge debugging time provided > >> by poorly-typed languages and its effective relation to > >> job safety. So what ? > > > > No -- having worked on reasonably large projects > > in C, I can say that with professional programmers > > with experience in a language like C, this > > simply ceases to be an issue. *MOST* bugs > > in a professional C project have nothing to do > > with type safety. > > This is utter hogwash and it is a great folly to depend on the > infallibility of humans! Thanks for proving my point! Here we have a clearly novice user, who has been fed the impression Ada solves the problem of fallible humans. Imagine his surprise when he slowly progresses to serious programming, and starts to discover that all of his logic errors will continue to stay logic errors, Ada or no Ada. And the ultimate solution for those logic errors will come from -- horrors, fallible humans. Of course, for freshmen programmers whose biggest problem is getting the types right, Ada is clearly useful. No doubts about that. Also for those who are never going to progress to any programming that requires something more complex than getting the types right.