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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f948976d12c7ee33
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-25 03:25:41 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!dialin-145-254-043-044.arcor-ip.NET!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Boeing and Dreamliner
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 12:28:25 +0200
Organization: At home
Message-ID: <bdbtb3$regf8$2@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
References: <mailman.4.1056169754.352.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <zN9Ja.2184$N%6.569@nwrdny02.gnilink.net> <3EF5F3F3.6000806@attbi.com>
 <e2e5731a.0306231813.35f7dd7a@posting.google.com>
 <pNOJa.9904$Kg7.2691@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <slrnbfgb3u.40l.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <BaYJa.40611$hI1.26447@nwrddc01.gnilink.net>
 <f9OdnbIRp--PSGWjXTWJjA@gbronline.com>
 <Qc6Ka.14618$Kg7.12799@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-145-254-043-044.arcor-ip.net (145.254.43.44)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1056536740 28787176 145.254.43.44 (16 [77047])
User-Agent: KNode/0.7.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39713
Date: 2003-06-25T12:28:25+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hyman Rosen wrote:

> Wesley Groleau wrote:
>> In some application domains, using C++ should be criminal.
> 
> Umm, no.

Not naming concrete languages: "using knowingly wrong technology is criminal 
in some application domains." Using any programming language is definitely 
a technology. Thus, according to you, C++ is universally applicable 
everywhere under any circumstances. I would not claim that even for Ada.

>> The fact that Ada is not perfect will NEVER justify using
>  > something that's worse when lives are at stake.
> 
> C++ isn't worse. It's different. People who favor their own
> little pet language will say it's worse, but that's not really
> my problem. I'm sure C++ is used in lots of areas where lives
> are at stake.

Compare with: "I'm sure that many physicians do not clean their hands."

>  > Were lives at stake in Ariane?
> 
> Hundreds of millions of dollars were at stake, which is easily
> the equivalent of a few lives. Lots of lives, in some places.

So the proposition is:

"In some places one could take someone's life for pair dollars => if 
somebody dies because of my fault, I would not care, I would just get one 
beer less."

Observe that logically (and legally) it isn't perfect, because "place" in 
the left and right parts of the proposition are different.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
www.dmitry-kazakov.de