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,da46977c58c329df X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-01 09:18:20 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!znr.news.ans.net!news.chips.ibm.com!newsfeed.btv.ibm.com!news.btv.ibm.com!not-for-mail From: pontius@btv.MBI.com.invalid (Dale Pontius) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada's Slide To Oblivion ... Date: 1 Feb 2002 17:18:19 GMT Organization: IBM Global Services North -- Burlington, Vermont, USA Message-ID: References: <4519e058.0201310714.650888e1@posting.google.com> <3C598CAA.7040801@home.com> <3C59FCD3.928144FB@adaworks.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: kimon.btv.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: news.btv.ibm.com 1012583899 30200 9.61.131.227 (1 Feb 2002 17:18:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@btv.ibm.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Feb 2002 17:18:19 GMT X-Newsreader: knews 1.0b.0 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19494 Date: 2002-02-01T17:18:19+00:00 List-Id: In article <3C59FCD3.928144FB@adaworks.com>, Richard Riehle writes: ... > Imagine a surgeon who discovers how much money can be saved > by purchasing Xacto blades instead of using blades manufactured > to more stringent standards. That is exactly the situation we are > currently facing when contractors decide to use C or C++ instead > of Ada. On the surface one gets the same result. It is only that > superficial result that counts for the lowest bidder. > > Richard Riehle > You've made it into my file of most interesting quotes with this one. Every now and then I try to point out that C programming cost us all billions of dollars in the second half of last year. But 'what everyone does' must be good enough, even if it's so expensive, and there is something better. By today's common programming practices, we have a situation where the simplest/easiest way of programming string input gives buffer overflows, and there for security holes. In C, that is. Don't know about C++, but at least in Ada, the simplest/easiest way of programming string input at worst would give a DOS problem as the program crashed, and it wouldn't be much harder to catch the exception and stop that. Dale Pontius NOT speaking for IBM