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-Thread: 103376,486d4972706e99db X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!138.195.8.3.MISMATCH!news.ecp.fr!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: =?iso-8859-15?Q?Yannick_Duch=EAne_=28Hibou57=29?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Bug rate and choice of programming language Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:45:35 +0200 Organization: Ada At Home Message-ID: References: <9b242840-3400-4d5c-aa1e-db238701aebe@l6g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: anOtUalzMUZHasssFqT+2w.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.60 (Win32) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13070 Date: 2010-08-10T16:45:35+02:00 List-Id: Le Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:22:01 +0200, Maciej Sobczak = a =E9crit: > programming languages for safety critical systems with the conclusion > that the choice of programming language has little impact on the > resulting bug rate and what actually matters is the programmer's > fluency in using it. Seems it is viewed like a personal affair (it seems "The" centered as it= = is expressed in the message) OK, if he/she works alone, on something which will never be revisited by= = others, will never be maintained by others, if nobody else will have to = = understand what he/she did and he/she did so. By the way, there is no need for public assessment in personal areas = (joking). The question is also: what about collective works (a common case) or abo= ut = lonely works (a very common case) where the lonely author will have to = come back to what he/she did months or years later. I believe you may = already have read such a reply and there is nothing new in these words..= . = and there indeed may be a reason for that: practice and real life. If you ask any one, with its favorite who-know-which in hand, even in = QBasic results may be good... for some time. If time or numerous other = people takes part, this is not the same story. Disclaimer: replied on the basis of this sole post, as the document does= = not seems to be available on-line (so could not read it). -- = There is even better than a pragma Assert: a SPARK --# check. --# check C and WhoKnowWhat and YouKnowWho; --# assert Ada; -- i.e. forget about previous premises which leads to conclusion -- and start with new conclusion as premise.