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: 103376,5cb36983754f64da
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-13 07:41:52 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!diablo.netcom.net.uk!netcom.net.uk!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!uninett.no!ntnu.no!not-for-mail
From: Preben Randhol <randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@pvv.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping
 language)
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:41:52 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: PVV
Message-ID: 
 <slrnc2ps20.1jj.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
References: <20040206174017.7E84F4C4114@lovelace.ada-france.org>
 <mailman.3.1076142690.295.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
 <m3isij11u4.fsf_-_@insalien.org>
 <54759e7e.0402071124.322ea376@posting.google.com>
 <2460735.u7KiuvdgQP@linux1.krischik.com>
 <54759e7e.0402081525.50c7adae@posting.google.com>
 <Xns9489AEC0F8702jimmaureenrogers@204.127.36.1>
 <54759e7e.0402091826.2847e0c@posting.google.com>
 <vjah20tahj48fftkpeghp29ugnojfdd4r4@4ax.com>
 <54759e7e.0402101819.95cec1d@posting.google.com>
 <qdqj20lomb5865p7qb24eojpgk7ijpbikr@4ax.com> <402A29B4.3010807@noplace.com>
 <wvbrptcllmpb.fsf@europa2.Norway.Sun.COM> <402B763E.4000309@noplace.com>
 <slrnc2n1ck.21i.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <402CCAA8.7070000@noplace.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: k-083152.nt.ntnu.no
X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 1076686912 15174 129.241.83.152 (13 Feb 2004
 15:41:52 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:41:52 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.0 (Linux)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5532
Date: 2004-02-13T15:41:52+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2004-02-13, Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> wrote:
> Well, the seat belts are another issue. Its more like a case of 
> comparing a '62 Chevvy capable of 70mph with a Lamborghini Countache 
> capable of 170mph. Given that most roadways are limited to 65mph by law, 
> from an *engineering* perspective, either car will perform acceptably 
> with respect to speed. So, depending on other concerns (such as 
> financial factors) there is no reason not to choose the '62 Chevvy just 
> because it can't outrace the Lamborghini.
>
> Given that all analogies are weak arguments, I'd like to just make sure 
> it is clear that I don't consider Ada to be a '62 Chevvy, nor do I 
> consider C to be a Lamborghini. I'm only objecting to making the race 
> course into an overriding concern when most people will never even get 
> on one.

I agree with you. What I wanted to point out was that for me safety is more
important than some extra milliseconds. I'm tried of programs (in C,
C++) that crash and you loose 1-2 hours work. If one had used Ada in
stead one could have caught the unexpected exception at the outer layer and
done an emergency save of the data so that one would waste 1-2 hours of
work.

So in stead of comparing C (or C++) and Ada without checks on, one
should compare Ada with C (or C++) that has the same checks.

-- 
"Saving keystrokes is the job of the text editor, not the programming
 language."