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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a83c46b54bacb7f6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Hyman Rosen <hymie@prolifics.com>
Subject: Re: JOB:Sr. SW Engineers Wanted-Fortune 500 Co
Date: 2000/02/01
Message-ID: <t73drc6a1k.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 580447343
Sender: hymie@calumny.jyacc.com
References: <3894A823.92EC75D1@bondtechnologies.com>
 <874b7r$mj9$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <t7iu09q36i.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com>
 <38967537_1@news.jps.net> <t7n1pk6gwx.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com>
 <s9e3f6fver26@corp.supernews.com> <t7bt606bro.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com>
 <s9e96d4uer236@corp.supernews.com>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com
X-Trace: news.panix.com 949430429 12219 209.49.126.226 (1 Feb 2000 18:40:29
 GMT)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC
NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Feb 2000 18:40:29 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-02-01T18:40:29+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Pat Rogers" <progers@NOclasswideSPAM.com> writes:
> No.  They treated all exceptions as indication of hardware failures
> because they didn't believe
> they could happen due to software.  They didn't meaningfully handle the
> exception -- they aborted the program!  Since they abused the software
> they were reusing (by using it in a different context, in which
> exceptions were unavoidable) their assumptions were invalid.

When you have proved that something can not happen, you will not then
add code to handle that event gracefully. After all, that's the entire
point of software proofs in the first place. If it turns out that your
proof is in error, it is exceedingly unlikely that the code will fall
back to a reasonable behavior.

Do you see people writing 'if a = 3 and then a = 3' just in case the
first equality was a fluke?