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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!fx18.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Hubert <herrdoktor@fumanchu.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What exactly is the licensing situation with GNAT?
References: <DA%7w.753721$Y4.288171@fx24.iad>
 <22a3816a-4e89-48f0-a126-dce581781beb@googlegroups.com>
 <mqw8w.739469$w82.82975@fx21.iad>
 <cd91630f-d78d-4eab-830c-f71005e93fc0@googlegroups.com>
 <084b1934-9641-425e-85ec-293e0334413e@googlegroups.com>
 <86bf69c8-eb08-4696-b6c9-3784f5c42213@googlegroups.com>
 <Jwy8w.500685$Ub6.487517@fx20.iad>
 <d4b8f45d-e327-4d78-a0d6-838aba063e4d@googlegroups.com>
 <lyoascltws.fsf@pushface.org> <YYE8w.620042$Lj7.284655@fx22.iad>
 <87389olqie.fsf@ixod.org> <zTF8w.509165$No4.167804@fx19.iad>
 <fca06fd0-6970-46a5-95b9-6b6317a37f7c@googlegroups.com>
 <aSG8w.567817$Q61.266688@fx13.iad> <m40odq$tdv$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <DbU8w.703256$Fo3.563225@fx09.iad> <m439g4$bq9$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <m43c6o$1v1$1@dont-email.me> <10d9w.55626$8w1.22302@fx12.iad>
 <150er0b62wsh3$.1xabmp81w5kdw.dlg@40tude.net>
 <2Oj9w.86043$uw3.37688@fx10.iad> <g7kfyy8dc0dn.vbx9yb5i07os$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <FAx9w.509649$_k.349560@fx16.iad>
In-Reply-To: <FAx9w.509649$_k.349560@fx16.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 141114-0, 11/14/2014), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Message-ID: <PWx9w.649526$FX2.192593@fx18.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 01:23:59 UTC
Organization: http://www.NewsDemon.com
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 17:24:10 -0800
X-Received-Bytes: 2556
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3570435611
X-Original-Bytes: 2575
Xref: number.nntp.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:190653
Date: 2014-11-14T17:24:10-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

I don't know if I made myself clear enough.

You were trying to show that my argument was false by giving an analogy 
that sounded absurd and then concluding that my argument was equally absurd.

I tried to show that the conclusion I drew was valid, but not based on 
an argument like the one you gave but instead for other reasons. The 
fact that Ada is safer than C has nothing to do with the fact that the 
OO techniques that are present in Ada as well as C++, Java and a host of 
other modern language lead people to write badly planned software. 
Writing procedural software will instead lead to better planned software 
because it forces people to do more planning.

Hope that makes it clearer.




---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com