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: 103376,af0c6ea85f3ed92d X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Received: by 10.68.135.231 with SMTP id pv7mr3063455pbb.8.1328855596896; Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:33:16 -0800 (PST) Path: wr5ni7653pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!og8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Rob Shea Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Arbitrary Sandbox Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 22:18:14 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <8e83f2be-c6e9-4b0b-b53c-d50fe70d01e1@pq6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 114.76.94.142 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1328855596 2728 127.0.0.1 (10 Feb 2012 06:33:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:33:16 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: og8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=114.76.94.142; posting-account=3Ly23AoAAABzcQBzLiIXe1WPOFNRSfDG User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: HUALENKRC X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/10.0,gzip(gfe) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: 2012-02-09T22:18:14-08:00 List-Id: I understand the benefits of Ada in embedded systems and the like, but are these benefits lost when used on top of all the abstraction that is Windows? Cheers, Rob On Feb 10, 5:15=A0pm, Jeffrey Carter wrote: > On 02/09/2012 09:41 PM, Rob Shea wrote: > > > > >> =A0 =A0 The use of the term "Sandbox" suggests security is a primary g= oal. =A0Ada > >> was invented for the military. > > > True, and that is a bit point in favour. > > More along those lines: Ada is the language of choice for software that m= ust > behave correctly. It's the language of choice for SW that flies jetliners= , > controls passenger trains, controls nuclear reactors, and the like. > > Why is that? The answer is lives and money. If the SW fails, lives may be= lost, > and the company could be out billions of dollars. Ada has demonstrated th= at it > is the least expensive way to get SW that won't do that. > > So if correct behavior of your SW is important, Ada is the way to go. You= 'll > have to pay for decent SW engineers, and they're not cheap. If you don't = care > how the SW behaves, then you might be able to save some development money= by > using a popular language and the cheap people who use it. But if you've g= ot > decent SW engineers, a small group of them using Ada can usually produce = better > SW faster and cheaper than a large group of coders using a popular langua= ge. > > -- > Jeff Carter > "IMHO, Interfaces are worthless." > Randy Brukardt > 117 > > --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to n...@netfron= t.net ---