TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Geoff Bull <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 1 Nov 1999 11:09:07 +1100
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (14 lines)
Ben Brosgol wrote:
>
>   Nevertheless the
> language's very high degree of portability and safety (more than Ada's in
> fact)

I will believe that Java is more portable than Ada,
so long as there is a JVM for the platform of interest,
but safer?
E.g. there are no run time value range checks.

Most Java checking was put in there for security, not safety,
reasons.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2