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: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-10 16:25:16 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada From: The Ghost In The Machine Subject: Re: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died (was): 64 bit addressing and OOP References: <9fa75d42.0304300412.3c9f8157@posting.google.com> <98BC68183770643E.43B22CFE5F4D5EFD.5566989BE627964B@lp.airnews.net> <9fa75d42.0305010645.7a5572ed@posting.google.com> <3EB1C603.7788E194@adaworks.com> <83jno-vjm.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net> <5Cuua.10$tc5.3@nwrdny03.gnilink.net> X-face: "i;@/WO(?;[KC9sW;wG/4@H[_VFFH4?QHJ#O(?m}7fQMrJ,]0THA'\|e-EPG_>56Mi}_RRhBS'a2}u_7jm)0_+'=$V#E2r4#IQE/d)yMv3_4@hl<)mA&*tDN/ User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 23:23:13 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.247.206.94 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net 1052608993 165.247.206.94 (Sat, 10 May 2003 16:23:13 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 16:23:13 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:63507 comp.object:63188 comp.lang.ada:37164 Date: 2003-05-10T23:23:13+00:00 List-Id: In comp.lang.java.advocacy, Frank J. Lhota wrote on Thu, 08 May 2003 15:21:37 GMT <5Cuua.10$tc5.3@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>: > "The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in > message news:83jno-vjm.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net... >> No problem, the C compiler would have caught it. :-) > > Not necessarily! Most C compilers will compile the following code without > warning, although actually calling this version of funcname is bound to > cause trouble. > > /**************************************/ > #include > > void funcname (FILE file) > { > fprintf( &file, "Hello, World!\n" ); > } > Ewww. Buffer loss, memory leak. Not good. :-) -- #191, ewill3@earthlink.net It's still legal to go .sigless.