Re: Faulty languages and Liability

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

Well, O.K. Fair enough. But I wasn't really thinking only of arrays - or
even only of Ada. There are *lots* of common programming errors that could
be checked and detected statically or dynamically that currently aren't
because programs are built in C/C++ and checking those errors is not
automagic. Things like parameter passing to subroutines or the
referencing/dereferencing of things by address. Many of these things can be
fixed by Ada or other languages that do better type checking and such. You
can do it manually by inserting your own code and/or code reviews and/or
rigorous testing, etc, etc, etc. All that costs more than having the
compiler do it for you. To *that* extent - its always cheaper. There may be
other factors on a project that make some other less safe language less
expensive to use - even if you have to add in all the costs of insuring
minimal safety.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message
news:kvL0$8CK4ybO@eisner.encompasserve.org...
>
> We cannot prejudge what would be cheaper in all situations.
> Some programs make only minor use of arrays.