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: fac41,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,5da92b52f6784b63 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: ffc1e,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidffc1e,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Papers on the Ariane-5 crash and Design by Contract Date: 1997/03/22 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 227400979 Distribution: world References: <332B5495.167EB0E7@eiffel.com> Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.programming.threads,comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-03-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <33330FE5.3F54BC7E@eiffel.com> Bertrand Meyer writes: > > From this we learn that Java and Ada 95 are not properly designed for > > Design by Contract. > > Which is the simple truth. The designers of these languages have > explicitly rejected the inclusion of assertions. Why? They are the > ones to ask. I am sure they must have their reasons (however > unlikely it is I would find these to be good reasons). It is simply amazing to see you sit there (or type there) and say in one breath "Which is the simple truth" and then proceed to make an absolutely false statement in the next. In fact, it is extremely disappointing and makes you look ridiculous. Ada _has_ assertions. Their form is not of the same syntactical look as Eiffel's. So what? They take the form of constraints, in particular (wrt to the case at hand) subtype constraints. They are _not_ as flexible or full "featured" as Eiffel's but they are certainly there and in the Ariane case, they are every bit as capable as Eiffel's. There is no difference in this sort of case. You are just plain a) wrong or b) - well it doesn't take a genius to fill in the obvious answer to this option. > > It's bad enough that you post statements that are explicitly > > contradicted by the Ariane V final report (e.g. that the IRS could not be > > tested in a black-box environment). When you post statements that are > > contradicted by your *own* paper... > > No evidence has been furnished of either of the purported > contradictions. Do you have any idea how ridiculous this sort of statement makes you look??? You are not doing Eiffel any favors here... /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com