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: 103376,28cd155693714664 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-16 05:17:16 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!out.nntp.be!propagator2-SanJose!propagator-SanJose!in.nntp.be!news-in-sanjose!newsfeed.onecall.net!chcgil2-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!news.binc.net!kilgallen From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Faulty languages and Liability Date: 16 Jun 2002 07:07:05 -0600 Organization: LJK Software Message-ID: References: <3D0C7C0B.5000707@mail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1024229194 20389 192.135.80.34 (16 Jun 2002 12:06:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 12:06:34 +0000 (UTC) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26076 Date: 2002-06-16T07:07:05-06:00 List-Id: In article <3D0C7C0B.5000707@mail.com>, Hyman Rosen writes: > Robert C. Leif wrote: >> I was hoping to find a lawyer to speak on software product liability > > It's a pretty sad state of affairs when you are reduced to trying > to force people to use Ada at the point of a gun. And of course > that *was* tried with the govenrnment mandate and it failed. I am not the person you quote, but my interest as a software (including embedded software) consumer has only to do with how well it works, not with how that is achieved. If a vendor wants to provide me software, be it an Ada compiler or an airbag controller, that is written in the APL programming language, that is immaterial to me so long as the result is high reliability. As a citizen with some knowledge of the field, I think Ada is far superior to most languages, although languages differences can be swept away by differences in company attitude. A company that used Ada and sought my investment in their stock would find that using Ada was not my sole criterion, even as regards reliability of software. > I also point out to you that when your house is broken into or your > car is stolen, you're not going to have any luck suing the makers > of the locks. LoJack promises a refund if they can't find your car. The idea of suing a high-security lock manufacturer if that was the entry point is not out of the question, but the likelihood of that being the entry point is low. > If I was sued becuase I didn't use Ada, I would point out to the > jury the results of using Ada on the Ariane 5. You may think it's > unfair, but, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my worthy opponent > wants my client to use software which demonstrably resulted in > millions of dollars of damage and loss. Certainly you should argue that no other rocket has ever crashed. But as a I said, there are other criteria besides using Ada, such as not trying to use the unmodified Ariane 4 software in the Ariane 5 rocket.