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: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-03-03 09:41:13 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!zeus.visi.com!priapus.visi.com!orange.octanews.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!news.octanews.net!feed2.newsreader.com!newsreader.com!newshosting.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!border1.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ash.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!207.35.177.252!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Those "home hobbyists..." (was: No call for Ada) References: <%m50c.76666$Xp.353067@attbi_s54> In-Reply-To: <%m50c.76666$Xp.353067@attbi_s54> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 12:27:10 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.223.163 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1078334767 198.96.223.163 (Wed, 03 Mar 2004 12:26:07 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 12:26:07 EST Organization: Bell Sympatico Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6033 Date: 2004-03-03T12:27:10-05:00 List-Id: tmoran@acm.org wrote: >>Efficiency in software production doesn't equate necessarily to >>quality. That is a leap of faith. > > Who said anything about quality? The context, IIRC, was about money, > where efficiency is relevant. Where I started was that "an Ada to C compiler would be useful", then clarified that "an open sourced version of the same would be useful". You added that (paraphrased) "commercial tools are also efficient" (and thus "useful"). So I think this thread has now run its course. Beyond this, things start to become OT, which I'll agree to drop here. ;-) -- Warren W. Gay VE3WWG http://ve3wwg.tk