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=2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,11e38e162c16b469
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.236.185.194 with SMTP id u42mr11070103yhm.29.1344998912463;
        Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 c6ni115625004qas.0!nntp.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nrc-news.nrc.ca!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.stack.nl!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: A new name for software failure : the glitch
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 09:16:17 -0500
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <k0353j$9ts$1@speranza.aioe.org>
References: <2bd4ae1c-c8c7-4553-9f7f-9b6915b30c33@googlegroups.com>
 <k02vjh$sd6$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <502512c7$0$6566$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Reply-To: nma@12000.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: 9ii5QNw33OfeoTzEH8w9ug.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-08-10T09:16:17-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 8/10/2012 8:56 AM, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

>
> Tricky. Neither Java nor OCaml can be called weakly typed
> or not robust. APL implementations do not count as not robust
> either, AFAIK.

Thanks, but I was thinking of high frequency trading software. I read that
mostly C++ is mainly used there. This is real-time, hundreds of
transactions in one second type of software. Yes, Java is strongly
typed also. I do not know anything myself about OCaml and
APL (did not even know that APL is still around).

>
> AdaCore uses this opportunity to point out offerings that
> are related to reliability and verification, but does not
> specifically mention Ada.
>
> Saying "Ada would have prevented" might turn out to be rather silly in
> this case.
>

yes.

--Nasser