Re: glade starting points? [About ADA]

Wolfgang Sourdeau <> wrote on 21/08/2000 (08:45) :
> La plume légère, à Mon, Aug 21, 2000 at 06:32:34PM +1200, heure d'inpiration,
> Franck Martin écrivait en ces mots:
> > The problem: programmers don't like it, because you have to be a maniac to
> > program it (petty syntaxic details). But that's what is required when you
> > want to bomb Yougoslavia without too much collateral damage. 

You have to be a maniac to program Ada? This is just crap. You must be a
maniac programming in syntactical mess like perl for instance, but not

Ada is stricter when it comes to for instance types, but this is
extremely useful when you are programming a huge project. Of course you
have to be a bit more disciplined when you program, but you will end up
saving time. Why? Because a lot of your bugs are discovered by the
compiler, thus saving a lot of debugging.

Btw it is _not_ called ADA it is Ada.

> Does this mean civils were actually targetted then ?

I don't know who they targeted, but it has nothing to do with Ada

> > [the first Ariane 5 blew up, because of ONE register overflow]
> I don't see here where robustness is...

Because it isn't the correct picture. For more info read:

PS: Would you board a plane running Gnome? Didn't think so...

Preben Randhol - Ph. D student -
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent", Isaac Asimov

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]