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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930
X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922
X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-04-24 23:58:25 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!news.xtra.co.nz!53ab2750!not-for-mail
From: "AG" <ang@xtra.co.nz>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc
References: <mvul4v00ftbai2g6duuh0r38jpii2qvpjl@4ax.com>
 <9fa75d42.0302260618.7506cba7@posting.google.com>
 <3E5CF5C6.84822F57@adaworks.com>
 <a3eaa964.0302261448.6f38de58@posting.google.com>
 <8qkczsAcGcn+Ew83@nildram.co.uk>
 <a3eaa964.0304162216.60978001@posting.google.com>
 <3EA04A1E.CAFC1FEF@adaworks.com>
 <9fa75d42.0304221126.7112b7d5@posting.google.com>
 <b84gku$2i5l$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>
 <9fa75d42.0304230439.55d28e70@posting.google.com>
 <slrnbadndp.o8q.mbkennelSPAMBEGONE@lyapunov.ucsd.edu>
 <9fa75d42.0304240503.54dbc5d1@posting.google.com>
 <WLKGbLATlNq+EwiQ@nildram.co.uk>
Subject: Re: the Ada mandate,
 and why it collapsed and died (was): 64 bit  addressing and OOP
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Message-ID: <k05qa.27935$mZ4.329924@news.xtra.co.nz>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 18:58:44 +1200
NNTP-Posting-Host: 219.88.61.100
X-Complaints-To: newsadmin@xtra.co.nz
X-Trace: news.xtra.co.nz 1051253904 219.88.61.100 (Fri,
 25 Apr 2003 18:58:24 NZST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 18:58:24 NZST
Organization: Xtra
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:62643 comp.object:61922
 comp.lang.ada:36523 misc.misc:13673
Date: 2003-04-25T18:58:44+12:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Tom Welsh" <news@tom-welsh.co.uk> wrote in message
news:WLKGbLATlNq+EwiQ@nildram.co.uk...

> There are, of course, many other reasons for the relatively low level of
> software quality - notably the absence of explicit demand (as expressed
> through the traditional medium of cash).

That's true. There is also a small matter that no customer
is really interested in quality as such. As long as the software
performs as expected it's fine (as far as the user is concerned
it may be made of duct tape).

The quality as in language/methodology/process is or
should be a primary concern of the developer - since
it is  [a bit :-)]  involved in making a project a success
or not in the first place.