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: 103376,bc5c0fdbfd63e56a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) Subject: Re: general comment on CLA Date: 1997/09/19 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 273847100 References: Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-09-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >On 18 Sep 1997, Robert Dewar wrote: >> I am about to decide that CLA is no longer worth following, but if other >> people feel that these kinds of threads are reasonable, fine. It's not *that* bad, Robert. Don't go away. Yes, the cross-posted language wars contain mostly nonsense posted by people who don't know what they're talking about, but they do contain *some* useful discussion. For example, I find the argument about Ada-style exception handling vs Eiffel's "retry" thing somewhat interesting. And separate specs vs short-flat tools (although that one is getting repetetive). At least it's Eiffel vs Ada, which have enough in common that the differences are worth discussing. If it bores you, kill-file it. All in all, I'd say comp.lang.ada has better signal-to-noise than any newsgroup I've read (except comp.compilers, which is moderated, so language comparisons get squelched if they start getting too "war"-like). Just be glad that the Ada vs Red language "war" isn't crossposted to comp.lang.red. ;-) - Bob