Xref: utzoo comp.sw.components:331 comp.software-eng:2158
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!gatech!udel!rochester!rit!mjl
From: mjl@cs.rit.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sw.components,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Software quality
Message-ID: <1345@cs.rit.edu>
Date: 12 Oct 89 21:59:42 GMT
References: <16193@vail.ICO.ISC.COM> <6756@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Sender: news@cs.rit.edu
Reply-To: mjl@prague.UUCP (Michael Lutz)
Followup-To: comp.sw.components
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY
Lines: 19

In article <6756@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>From article <16193@vail.ICO.ISC.COM>, by rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn):
>> And what's this about advanced programming languages?  Wolfe has, in other
>> postings, been an outspoken advocate of Ada, which is certainly *not*
>> advanced.  
>
>    Oh, then let's talk about how "advanced" C is, over in comp.lang.misc.

I'm into lingua-snobbery as much as anyone else, but is this really
the forum for it?  And using it to willyhorton someone else's position
certainly does nothing to give added credibilty to your own.  So
let's drop this and get back to the interesting quality issues that
started this thread.

Mike Lutz
Mike Lutz	Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester NY
UUCP:		{rutgers,cornell}!rochester!ritcv!mjl
CSNET:		mjl%rit@relay.cs.net
INTERNET:	mjl@cs.rit.edu