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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 10db24,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public
X-Google-Thread: ff6c8,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gidff6c8,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b7857cb3cbabcf8d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
From: demer@cdfsun03 (David Emery)
Subject: Re: Ada News Brief
Date: 1996/10/18
Message-ID: <DEMER.96Oct18130902@cdfsun03>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 190473084
references: <533utt$43p@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us>
 <Dz96K7.Js6@thomsoft.com>
organization: Hughes Aircraft Company
newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.ada,comp.sw.components,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.edu
Date: 1996-10-18T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Steve Jones wrote:
>The problem is that new technologies come out first in C (now in C++)
>and projects have to go that way.

I don't understand this infatuation with 'latest and greatest' in 
safety-critical/mission-critical systems.  I sure wouldn't want my
life to depend on V1.0 of *anything*, particularly some commercial
product, developed using a commercial (i.e. first to market wins, and
we'll fix the bugs later) mentality.  

Is there *anyone* out there who tried to deliver anything using
MS-Windows 1.0?  I saw my first Windows spec in 1984, and that was for
Windows 2.0.  The consensus I've heard was that Windows didn't get
reliable until Version 3.1... 

				dave
--
<.sig is away on vacation>