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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3ccb707f4c91a5f2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Unbounded strings (Was: Java vs Ada 95 (Was Re: Once again,
 Ada absent from DoD SBIR solicitation))
Date: 1996/11/24
Message-ID: <dewar.848818302@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 198394096
references: <325BC3B3.41C6@hso.link.com> <dewar.848202876@merv>
 	<E11C57.EF2@world.std.com> <dewar.848352010@merv>
 	<E14DCH.5EK@world.std.com> <JSA.96Nov19210658@alexandria>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-11-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Jon Anthony said

"Hmmmm.  Really.  I think Robert has been hoisted on his own petard, :-)"

Not at all, Jon, you have just been taken in by that classical argument
technique "argument by false analogy". It goes like this,

Ah ha, you said A, but if you say A, then you must also mean B and
B is ridiculous.

Fine, in this case I agree that B (not  providing proper sequential
semantics) is ridulous, but it has  very little to do with A (knowing
exactly what task safe means).