Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!bellcore!faline!ulysses!sfmag!sfsup!mpl
From: mpl@sfsup.UUCP (M.P.Lindner)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: "C" vrs ADA
Message-ID: <1925@sfsup.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Aug-87 13:44:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: sfsup.1925
Posted: Mon Aug 24 13:44:19 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Aug-87 06:12:42 EDT
References: <1065@vu-vlsi.UUCP> <253@etn-rad.UUCP> <1146@watmum.waterloo.edu> <6323@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T-IS, Summit N.J. USA
Lines: 14
Summary: but...

In article <6323@brl-smoke.ARPA>, gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) writes:
> In article <1146@watmum.waterloo.edu> smvorkoetter@watmum.waterloo.edu (Stefan M. Vorkoetter) writes:
> >The problem with Ada (as with PL/I) is that it is so big, it is hard to
> >ensure that one's compiler is reliable.
> 
> Size has little to do with this.  As the people from Metaware would
> probably tell you, what is necessary is a formal semantic specification
> against which the implementation may be gauged.

Oh, but size has *everything* to do with it.  Or, actually, complexity.
Try desribing a test suite for a factorial program which handles input from
1 to 10, then try a test suite for Ada.  Betcha I can guess that you can
find every error in the factorial program, but at least one is left in the Ada
compiler.