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: 103376,3bc0f8534280c976,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-03-27 17:41:02 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Path: nntp.gmd.de!dearn!blekul11!ccsdec1.ufsia.ac.be!reks.uia.ac.be!idefix.CS.kuleuven.ac.be! Belgium.EU.net!EU.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!psinntp!ocsystems!oec From: oec@ocsystems.com (Oliver E. Cole) Subject: Ada95 compatibility Message-ID: <1995Mar27.190040.30708@ocsystems.com> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 19:00:40 GMT Organization: OC Systems, Inc. Date: 1995-03-27T19:00:40+00:00 List-Id: Here is an interesting tidbit about the compatability of Ada83 and Ada95. The OCS products are written in Ada. We recently bootstrapped our product line in Ada95. There were no incompatabilities except in some packages where we implemented the new Ada95 constructs in our compiler. We had used some Ada95 reserved words while implementing the Ada95 constructs!! This was very simple to fix, but there is a lesson here somewhere (although I am not sure what it is). Anyway, there was no pain going from Ada83 to Ada95 and we have lots of code. Quit worrying. --oec --- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Oliver E. Cole oec@ocsystems.com OC Systems, Inc. (703) 359-8165 -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Oliver E. Cole oec@ocsystems.com