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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,42427d0d1bf647b1,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: KMays@msn.com (Kenneth Mays)
Subject: Ada Core Technologies and Ada95 Standards
Date: 1996/03/25
Message-ID: <00001a73+00002c20@msn.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 144209902
organization: The Microsoft Network (msn.com)
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-03-25T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Greetings,

I read that Ada Core Technologies is taking over the GNAT project. 
There is also talk of GNAT V3.04 becoming available on all platforms. 
For the latest news check: http://www.gnat.com and 
ftp://ftp.cs.nyu.edu/pub/gnat.

As far as the Air Force and Ada95, depends on some agencies. 
Engineers at Warner Robins AFB and a few other companies (who don't 
want their names spread) like Ada95 because it is easier to deal with 
over than C/C++. Most computer scientists/programmers/engineers 
forget that nonprogrammers have to deal with the code - and they 
would like to read that code (not the spaghetti stuff people used to 
write). Many programmers can confess that if you maintain code - its 
no\ice to be able to read it (even your own).

Again, C++ is a system programming language mainly for system 
programming - even though application programming is possible. C++ is 
an alternative to going back into the stone ages and writing in 
assembler. Ada95 leans more towards the application programming and 
embedded controllers. True, you can gripe over this. Personal talks 
to many contractors state that they do like C++, but I found it 
foolish to write everything in C++. Ada95 seems to fit the bill for 
the basic productivity, and C++ routines for high speed efficiency 
(this is typical of patching machine/assembler code to C/C++ 
programs).

By the way, talking about a validated or standardized Ada95 compiler. 
I think it is smart to have a baseline standard that all compilers 
should meet. Basically, the baseline standard would reflect that all 
compilers must comply to MIL-STD or whatever (like ANSI V2.5/3.0 of 
C++). That way, anything you pick up at the bookstore on Ada95 on 
BASIC/ADVANCED ADA95 programming - will compile and work as long as 
you stay away from platform specific libraries (GNAT-Ada95 or GCC 
works off this principle). I don't think this is too much to ask of 
any vendor (since the specs came out in Feb. 95). Without some sort 
of baseline standard, it is very hard to call a programming language 
**PORTABLE** in cross platforming world.

-Ken

"Make it work first, then add the darn features!"