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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: fac41,3ef3e78eacf6f938 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Thread: 103376,3ef3e78eacf6f938 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Thread: 1008e3,3ef3e78eacf6f938 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Thread: 108717,3ef3e78eacf6f938 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gide91fe56a56,gida07f3367d7,gid8d81cdf253,gid5b1e799cdb,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Maciej Sobczak Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.modula3,comp.programming Subject: Re: Alternatives to C: ObjectPascal, Eiffel, Ada or Modula-3? Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:31:56 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <4BA8BA91.4050905@cherrystonesoftware.com> <4ba8c0f5$0$6984$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <07c318a0-2644-4c02-9447-ed75d9cb3485@g28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.138.182.236 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1269419516 16722 127.0.0.1 (24 Mar 2010 08:31:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:31:56 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: g4g2000yqa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.138.182.236; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2) Gecko/20100115 Firefox/3.6,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.eiffel:532 comp.lang.ada:9725 comp.lang.modula3:152 comp.programming:14659 Date: 2010-03-24T01:31:56-07:00 List-Id: On 24 Mar, 07:33, "Martin Krischik" wrote: > > Are they supposed to make products for those platforms that they > > consider inferior? Why? > > Self fulfilling prophecy? > > Consider something inferior and then rigged the test condition to prove = =A0 > the point? That's one possibility. The other is: make a test (however naive), find the best platform (according to the test) and make products that target it. That would be actually rational. We can speculate, but objectively we don't know which is the case here and the innocent-until-proved-guilty rule of the modern society should prevent us from making unfounded accusations. I play the devil's advocate role here, but really I see no reasons to make a noise about this paper. Especially if Ada is not even being mentioned. >From the Ada point of view this paper is neither right nor wrong. Heck - it is actually off-topic here. :-) -- Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com YAMI4 - Messaging Solution for Distributed Systems http://www.inspirel.com/yami4