From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 5 May 93 21:35:19 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!ajpo.sei.cmu.edu!progers@ucbvax.Berke
ley.EDU  (Pat Rogers)
Subject: Re: Passing procedures as parameters to procedures.
Message-ID: <1993May5.173519.19233@sei.cmu.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <dewar.736623553@schonberg> dewar@schonberg.NYU.EDU (Robert Dewar) w
rites:
>Now I've seen it all:
>
>"Of course you can do this in Ada, just use package machine code to construct
>the code that you want to execute."
>
>Hmmm! why bother wih Ada/9X, just require Ada/83 compilers to implement
>package machine code and we can do anything we like :-)
>

Not that the above is what I said, but perhaps the implicit smiley was too 
subtle.  The intent was to answer the earlier statements that "It can't be 
done.", not to say that the demonstrated approach was desirable as a general 
mechanism. Which is why text was included indicating that 9X was the 
(obviously) preferrable way to go...

pat rogers
progers@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu