Ada 9X

[byrne@arecibo.aero.org]

The changes proposed in the Ada 9X Draft Mapping document seemed excessive to
me at first.  I still think that they have a long way to go to making the
syntax and textual changes clear and concise.  I think moving the rationale and
mapping changes into the LRM would help.  This would give the Ada community a
draft Ada 9X LRM to review.  Going through the changes with an Ada 83 LRM, the
Draft Mapping document, and the Draft Mapping Rationale document is cumbersome
and confusing.  

When I first read the mapping, the Protected Record (PR) seemed unnecessary. 
The same function could be provided by a standard generic package that the
vendor could optimize.  After some thought and reading other comments, however,
I have changed my opinion.  Avoiding the tasking form does give the vendor more
freedom to optimize.  Many older embedded designs will map nicely to the PR
format.

In addition, the tagged types look promising.  I think it's a shame that
revision process didn't start a few years earlier.  It would have given us more
time to experiment with the proposed changes.  After this revision is accepted,
I feel the AJPO should sponsor early research into changes for the next
revision.  If Ada is going to remain the standard language, it deserves
on-going R&D, just like planes, tanks, and computers.

Dan J. Byrne

Obviously, these are my unpaid, not-so-humble, personal opinions.