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,e6a2e4a4c0d7d8a6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 101deb,3488d9e5d292649f X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-02-20 22:25:11 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.algonet.se!algonet!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsfeed1.e.nsc.no!nsc.no!nextra.com!uio.no!newsfeed.song.fi!nntp.inet.fi!central.inet.fi!inet.fi!read3.inet.fi.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "Anders Wirzenius" Newsgroups: comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.ada References: <3E51908E.9CCA3412@adaworks.com> <8Gh4a.7455$_c6.743959@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <3E51ABCE.5491B9A2@adaworks.com> <3E5273DE.2050206@cox.net> <3E531E6F.BDFB2599@adaworks.com> <3E546C45.4010406@cox.net> <3E54F926.441D5BB5@adaworks.com> <3E550205.1010702@cox.net> Subject: Re: status of PL/I as a viable language MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 06:24:57 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.251.142.2 X-Complaints-To: abuse@inet.fi X-Trace: read3.inet.fi 1045808697 194.251.142.2 (Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:24:57 EET) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:24:57 EET Organization: Sonera corp Internet services Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.pl1:4384 comp.lang.ada:34329 Date: 2003-02-21T06:24:57+00:00 List-Id: "Donald L. Dobbs" wrote in message news:3E550205.1010702@cox.net... > > > Richard Riehle wrote: ... > > such as the F-22. The fact that developers can find a way to screw it > > up does not detract from the value of the language. If they can make > > a mess using a language with the rigorous controls built into Ada, > > imagine the magnitude of the mess they could make with, say, C++. > > And, no, PL/I would not help with a system this large and complex. > > > > Richard Riehle > > > Richard, > > You're right in that good (really good) programmers can produce > successful code not matter what tools (languages) they have to tolerate > while poor programmers (or at least poorly trained) will screw it up no > matter how good or bulletproof the language. Your ATC example > undoubtedly proves the point. > > Regards, > > -- Don. The masters are masters and the poor are poor. The majority of the programmers are just mediocre human beings like me (and you). The interesting question could be: What are the tools that helps us to do a good job? Anders