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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,52d2ab9c3dfbc246
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1993-03-12 11:54:07 PST
Path: sparky!uunet!caen!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!hawk!billk
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada scandal makes front page of Wash. Post business section
Message-ID: <C3sFnI.6ws@hawk.cs.ukans.edu>
From: billk@hawk.cs.ukans.edu (Bill Kinnersley)
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1993 18:06:47 GMT
References: <335@fedfil.UUCP> <EMERY.93Mar12101548@dr_no.mitre.org>
Organization: University of Kansas Computer Science Dept
Date: 1993-03-12T18:06:47+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <EMERY.93Mar12101548@dr_no.mitre.org> emery@dr_no.mitre.org (David Emery) writes:
: <Normally I don't respond to Ted's ravings, but there's a point I'd
:  like to make here.>
: 
: The morale of the story is that bad programmers can screw up using any
: language.  Ada just makes this more visible.
: 
It seems to me that the easiest way to refute this well-publicized example
is by giving a counterexample.  Is there a project that you can point to 

  a) Of comparable size, complexity and importance
  b) Ada was used
  c) The programmers were happy
  d) The customers were happy
  e) Modifications were easily made
  f) The project came in on time

-- 
--Bill Kinnersley
  billk@hawk.cs.ukans.edu
226 Transfer complete.