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,d1df6bc3799debed
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: johnherro@aol.com (John Herro)
Subject: Re: Language Design Mistakes (was "not intended...")
Date: 1997/05/15
Message-ID: <19970515150201.LAA15203@ladder02.news.aol.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 241719573
References: <337B0DDA.41C67EA6@spam.innocon.com>
X-Admin: news@aol.com
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-05-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Jeff Carter <carter@spam.innocon.com> writes:
> I think that was only MIL-STD-1815, dated 1980 Dec,
> not an ANSI standard.

I think you're right.  I was relying on my memory (not too reliable!),
because I have only the Ada 83 and Ada 95 standards with me.  I'm
sure I threw out my old copy of MIL-STD-1815.

I remember that MIL-STD-1815 had subtype NATURAL defined as
what is now subtype Positive, and it had no subtype POSITIVE at
all.  Also, of course, it allowed anonymous arrays for record
components.  There were some other differences with Ada 83,
which I don't recall at the moment.

- John Herro
Software Innovations Technology
http://members.aol.com/AdaTutor
ftp://members.aol.com/AdaTutor