Re: Faulty languages and Liability

[Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <3D0DE5E2.5010904@mail.com>, Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> writes:
> Robert C. Leif wrote:
>> The Ariane 5 was a design defect.
>> The code produced an error exactly as specified.
> 
> Yes, I know this. I have been here for a while, after all.
> 
> My argument is this. Someone is proposing to haul me into
> court because I use C++ instead of Ada.

No rational person is going to haul you into court because you use C++.
Somebody who hauls you into court because your software blew up may
bring up the issue of language as _one_ of a series of issues regarding
the reliability of your development process.  I presume that if they
say you didn't use Ada, you will also didn't use plain C.  Presumably
you will also show that you were not programming in C using a compiler
that happened to be a C++ compiler.

> Then we'll start with the finger pointing - "But Ada does
> this and C++ doesn't" = "But C++ does this and Ada doesn't".
> And we'll just conclude that it's up to the people who make
> software to decide what to use to make it.

If it got to that point yes.  But if I were on the jury you would be in
deep trouble if you said you used C++ because Microsoft endorsed it :-)

There is a serious question in my mind whether everyone using C* has
done so based on thorough reasoning.  Some would be much better off
implementing their project in Basic.