Re: Safe C++

[Colin_Paul_Gloster@ACM.org (Colin Paul Gloster)]

In article news:9ob2u6$2r4l$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu Chad R. Meiners wrote:
"[..]

I don't believe that you will find very many Ada advocates that have an
allergy to anything smacking of C. I have always been under the impression
that people on this newsgroup [..]"

I do not dispute that there are masters active on this newsgroup who have
solid experience to back their reservations. It is no secret though that
there are Ada advocates who strongly hate C. Not only C family languages,
but non-Ada languages. Of course someone who recommends Ada does not 
necessarily hate other languages but if you think that we do not
have such people you are mistaken.

Should you check the news:comp.realtime FAQ posting
(e.g. news:realtime-computing/faq_999165253@rtfm.mit.edu ,
"Comp.realtime: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)", 30 Aug 2001 09:55:25
GMT, Version: 3.4 (May 1998), also available at
HTTP://WWW.FAQs.org/faqs/realtime-computing/faq/ ) you can find:

"[..]
IV- POLEMIC TOPICS
[..]
    Which programming language should I use to develop a Real-Time System?
[..] it would be much better to use a higher level [than assembly]
programming language. Most of them will fit. The Ada Community will always
try to convince you their language is the best to use in any cases. Here is
not the news group to argue about this [..]".

Looking back through older posts in the Ada advocacy forum Team Ada one
could find furious frustration against C; C++; and Java.