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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-11 14:38:10 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: aek@vib.usr.pu.ru (Alexander Kopilovitch) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? Date: 11 Sep 2003 14:38:06 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: References: <3F5F7FDC.30500@attbi.com> <3F6079A9.6080108@attbi.com> <568ede3c.0309110925.57d07508@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.152.82.24 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1063316288 17320 127.0.0.1 (11 Sep 2003 21:38:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Sep 2003 21:38:08 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42391 Date: 2003-09-11T21:38:08+00:00 List-Id: Hyman Rosen wrote: >You are demonstrating one case where MI is not > appropriate, and you seem to think that this constitues a proof > that MI is never appropriate. Well, perhaps, you (or someone else) will set an example of proper argumentation by providing an full case (that is, not only piece of program code, but also sufficient information about surrounding application, its operational enviroment and expected lifecycle), showing the situation when MI is 1) appropriate, and 2) can't be implemented conveniently in Ada95, and even with the interfaces proposed for Ada200Y. Then we all can analyze that example in depth. > Socrates is a man. > Therefore all men are Socrates. Perhaps yes, while no one can (or will) show me at least one man, who is not Socrates (or at least looks like Socrates -:) . Alexander Kopilovitch aek@vib.usr.pu.ru Saint-Petersburg Russia