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,f948976d12c7ee33 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-22 11:16:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!pd90489d8.dip.t-dialin.NET!not-for-mail From: Tino Goertemoeller Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Boeing and Dreamliner Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 20:18:56 +0200 Organization: Foo Bar Message-ID: References: <3EF5B10E.40804@noplace.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: pd90489d8.dip.t-dialin.net (217.4.137.216) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1056305761 26147185 217.4.137.216 (16 [23412]) X-Orig-Path: eta.lan.goertemoeller.com!nobody User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39572 Date: 2003-06-22T20:18:56+02:00 List-Id: Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > James Rogers wrote: > >> I believe the point was that expert witnesses could not show that >> using Ada by itself prevents class A mishaps. In that respect he >> is correct. The remark was in response to the assertion that this >> newsgroup could provide many expert witnesses to support a claim >> that use of C++ in avionics was irresponsible. >> >> The problem is that such testimony is highly technical. >> Such a technical level of information is easily distorted by a >> clever lawyer who relies upon the confusion of the judge and >> jury. A question about the Ariane 5 would be the opening argument >> from such a lawyer. > > True, one should argue on same level of [in]competence. Isn't the time to > start sampling examples of crashes C/C++, C#, Java systems? http://www-aix.gsi.de/~giese/swr/index.html (german)