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: 103376,85034d1ac78a66eb
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-13 15:27:10 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!btnet-peer1!btnet-feed3!btnet-peer0!btnet-feed5!btnet!news.btopenworld.com!not-for-mail
From: "Pam Kelly" <al@adalinux.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada Operating System
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 23:26:11 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: BT Openworld
Message-ID: <a6on6j$k69$1@paris.btinternet.com>
References: <a4u9d00vqe@enews2.newsguy.com>
 <3c77b476.322111671@news.cis.dfn.de> <a5dhmg$l1a$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <m4ro7uorulr8cfn9tn3hk30cqi7mf4egdc@4ax.com> <a62kmf$giv$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <o2td8ug1chantij2e6j80kk56mrafp6e78@4ax.com> <a6825a$75c$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <3C88E0D1.89161C16@despammed.com> <a6m8h5$rpb$1@helle.btinternet.com>
 <3C8F5D44.2E2E2EE7@despammed.com> <a6oi8n$fhe$1@helle.btinternet.com>
 <oZVpXxHs63ZX@eisner.encompasserve.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host213-122-45-254.in-addr.btopenworld.com
X-Trace: paris.btinternet.com 1016061971 20681 213.122.45.254 (13 Mar 2002
 23:26:11 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news-complaints@lists.btinternet.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 23:26:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21172
Date: 2002-03-13T23:26:11+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Is it likely to be necessary to turn off Ada safety features in order to
'more or less' translate something like sendmail into Ada ?

Wouldn't it just depend ... if there had to be significant changes to parts
of an application (in order to retain naturally occurring safety features of
Ada) the point would still be made if a vulnerability occurred in a part of
the C version that was significantly the same as the Ada version.


"Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message
news:oZVpXxHs63ZX@eisner.encompasserve.org...
> In article <a6oi8n$fhe$1@helle.btinternet.com>, "Pam Kelly"
<al@adalinux.org> writes:
> > The Ada versions won't need maintenance :-)
> >
> > Seriously, to prove the point that Ada is in itself superior the Ada
> > versions would have to stick so closely to the design of the C versions
as
> > to be more or less straight translations - which would mean they would
> > benefit from past maintenance of the logic.
>
> That would also mean they would have to be wart-for-wart compatible,
> even when that means turning off Ada safety features.
>
> So what is the point of having an Ada implmentation ?