[log in to unmask] (Jerry van Dijk) quoted and then wrote:
>> >Really, I don't mind the safety-critical, high-integrity angle. But it
>> >would be nice to develop grass-roots support for Ada among those who
>> >aren't necessarily in that domain.
>> Safety-critical may be optional, but I have no interest in attracting
>> Ada advocates who are not interested in high-integrity. It is quite
>> possible to write lousy software in Ada, and the reputation of Ada is
>> best preserved by not attracting those who want to go in that direction.
>Are you _really_ saying that people like me should resign from this list
>and stop using Ada and leave you high and mighty people who do the
>really important work alone ?
Hmmm, I just don't understand what I said that might have given offense.
High-integrity to me means software that does what is needed for the
at hand, reliably, day in and day out. If your interests are otherwise, I
doubt that you would be on this list.