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: Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen Subject: Re: JOB:Sr. SW Engineers Wanted-Fortune 500 Co Date: 2000/02/01 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 580483163 Sender: ohk@gong1.clustra.com References: <3894A823.92EC75D1@bondtechnologies.com> <874b7r$mj9$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <877081$knt$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.no X-Trace: news.telia.no 949436278 195.204.160.194 (Tue, 01 Feb 2000 21:17:58 CET) Organization: Telia Internet Public Access NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 21:17:58 CET Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-02-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Ted Dennison writes: > In article , > Hyman Rosen wrote: > > Hyman Rosen writes: > > > Ted Dennison writes: > > > > find it appalling that anyone would develop a product like a > > > > pacemaker, on which the life of a human being depends on its > > > > continuous reliable operation, in a language known to be as > > > > error-prone as C. This is not an opportunity for me to be > > OK, I'm being a smartass, but I am making a valid point. > > Having its software written in Ada was not enough to keep > > the Ariane 5 from going off-course and being blown up. In > > That's a good point. Luckily, I never claimed any such thing. If someone > does, tell me and I'll jump in with you. > > > the same way, having the software of a pacemaker written > > in C is not enough to force it to blow up. I would assume > > that pacemaker software undergoes thorough critical-systems > > development and testing regardless of what language it's > > written in. > > No. But testing does not guarantee the total absence of bugs either > (another Arianne lesson). Thus it is not sufficient in my view to make > up for poor development tools with testing. By that logic it would be > perfectly OK for me to hand-machine aircraft parts with a hammer and > chisel, as long as they were all thoroughly tested. > > -- > T.E.D. It seem to me that you are severly underestimating the utility of hand tools, and the precision you can obtain by manual work. Followups to rec.crafts.metalworking :-) > > http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. -- E pluribus Unix