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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,198c6302c4a0b0d7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-17 17:16:28 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!news.binc.net!kilgallen
From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada / C++ comparison paper
Date: 17 Dec 2001 19:16:16 -0600
Organization: LJK Software
Message-ID: <HXFrGyszNlyf@eisner.encompasserve.org>
References: <3c1dc786@pull.gecm.com> <1008601517.470745@edh3>
 <1008626816.690418@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <9vls3v$en1$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org
X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1008638187 14453 192.135.80.34 (18 Dec 2001
 01:16:27 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 01:16:27 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18033
Date: 2001-12-17T19:16:16-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <9vls3v$en1$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, "Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> writes:
> I read the paper - that sounds maybe a tad harsh as criticism might go. Yes,
> its old and certainly written from a perspective of advocacy, but it didn't
> seem to be out *slandering* C++. The author(s) definitely have a bias, but
> that isn't necessarily bad so long as they don't start spreading rumors
> about C++ having illigitimate children and a bad drug habbit. :-) (Of
                                                        ^^^^^^
Shouldn't that be "hobbit" ? :-)