Your point was wrong. Your example illustrated that your point was wrong.
Bad code from dodgy, offshore outsourcing services may be in any language. Bad Ada code is no better than bad code in any other language. Bad Ada code could be worse if it often works by accident, where other code might have failed visibly and been rejected.
> Bad Ada code is no better than bad code in any other language.
Ada's strictness allows it to catch many more errors at compile time than, say, C.
> Bad Ada code could be worse if it often works by accident, where other code might have failed visibly and been rejected.
This is backward. Errors will be more easily detected in Ada than in, say, C. C is full of footguns and undefined behaviour. Vanilla Ada still isn't actually a safe language, unfortunately, but as a matter of degree, it's much safer than C.
One thing Ada was designed for and C++ not, was to prevent crappy developers to mess up.
Anyone that has reviewed C++ code from offshoring Asian companies is well aware of what I mean.