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: 103376,74b55538385b7366 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Keith Thompson Subject: Re: Ada safety road Was: Which is right ... Date: 1999/06/07 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 486940776 References: <928083159.436.79@news.remarQ.com> <928174549.336.98@news.remarQ.com> <7iuqkc$ln6$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <928529202.956.79@news.remarQ.com> <928569312.951.42@news.remarQ.com> <7jb1l9$694$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <928703068.617.98@news.remarQ.com> <1999Jun6.181633.1@eisner> <7jho5j$649$1@nnrp1.deja.com> X-Complaints-To: usenet@nusku.cts.com X-Trace: nusku.cts.com 928818024 19386 198.68.168.21 (8 Jun 1999 05:00:24 GMT) Organization: CTS Network Services NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Jun 1999 05:00:24 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-06-08T05:00:24+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar writes: > In article , > Keith Thompson wrote: > > This brings up a pet peeve of mine: the word "erroneous" was a > > poor choice of terminology. It's an existing English word > > with a well-defined meaning. When I use the word in an Ada > > context, I very often have to explain the Ada-specific > > meaning. > > The RM is *full* of ordinary english words used in a formal > manner. You have to make clear that you are speaking this > formal terminology when you do, and you should speak it only > to the initiated :-) Agreed. I've just found that "erroneous" is the single most troublesome example, probably because its normal English meaning is so clearly applicable the same Ada code to which the technical term applies. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> One of the great tragedies of ancient history is that Helen of Troy lived before the invention of the champagne bottle.