From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,38159b1b5557a2e7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-27 14:08:13 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!zeus.visi.com!priapus.visi.com!orange.octanews.net!news.octanews.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!verio!newsfeed.mathworks.com!wn11feed!worldnet.att.net!207.35.177.252!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Standard Ada Preprocessor References: <400A9B48.3060100@noplace.com> <400BD4B5.6000307@noplace.com> <400BDB7C.40100@noplace.com> <400D2150.6000705@noplace.com> <400E72F9.8060501@noplace.com> <100upo7ln5e3k59@corp.supernews.com> <400FC8E8.2040100@noplace.com> <_JSdna166JuxFo3dRVn-hg@comcast.com> <401115B7.5020205@noplace.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <%4BRb.52248$Kg6.387351@news20.bellglobal.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:53:52 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.223.163 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1075240379 198.96.223.163 (Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:52:59 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:52:59 EST Organization: Bell Sympatico Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4945 Date: 2004-01-27T16:53:52-05:00 List-Id: Pascal Obry wrote: > "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" writes: >>Impossible. Some UNIces provide some API structure members, >>while others don't, or provide something else again. Yes, >>you can dumb it down to a "standard" (or omit non-universal >>functionality), but by doing so you throw away functionality. >>I find that unacceptable. > > Well yet if the standard offers 99% of the functionality you need it remains > you to do the work for the remaining 1% ! Not that bad :) > > Pascal. Who guarantees that it will only be 1%? ;-) -- Warren W. Gay VE3WWG http://ve3wwg.tk