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,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,40af3383c244ff04
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Subject: Re: Ada 83 compiler
Date: 1997/10/01
Message-ID: <199710011310.PAA27409@basement.replay.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 277027398
References: <3431a4db.0@news.pacifier.com>
Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
X-001: Replay may or may not approve of the content of this posting
X-002: Report misuse of this automated service to <abuse@replay.com>
X-URL: http://www.replay.com/remailer/
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-10-01T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


<01bcccb5$53b2b9a0$8129accf@default>
<mheaney-ya023680003009970439540001@news.ni.net>

On 1 Oct 97 01:18:19 GMT, steved@pacifier.com (Steve Doiel) wrote:

> >In article <01bcccb5$53b2b9a0$8129accf@default>, "James H. Robinson, III"
> ><jr3uva90@erols.com> wrote:
> >
> >>I am a graduate student at George Mason University.  Can anyone recommend a
> >>cheap or free Ada compiler for Windows 95 or NT?
> >
> >Why Ada 83?  You can get a good-quality Ada 95 compiler for free at
> >
> ><ftp://ftp.cs.nyu.edu>.  Look under GNAT, the GNU NYU Ada Translator.
> >
> >See also <http://www.adahome.com>.
> >
> Also note that GNAT has a command line switch "-gnat83" to specify that an
> Ada 83 program is begin compiled.  When in this mode Ada95 extensions are
> rejected.
> 
> This is according to the GNAT users guide (Version 3.07).  I haven't used
> this mode myself so cannot recommend for or against.
> 

We're using the -gnat83 switch. We're developing using GNAT, but the
code will be compiled and run on a DEC Alpha under VMS with the DEC
Ada-83 compiler. I have suggested that we use GNAT, with support, for
that platform and take advantage of Ada's features, but it doesn't look
as if that will be allowed.

There are a couple of things that GNAT doesn't catch. One is the Ada-83
rule about using the name of the generic subprogram being declared in
the declaration:

   function "+" is new Some_Generic (Op => "+");

This is legal in Ada but illegal in Ada 83; -gnat83 doesn't catch it. We
get around it in DEC Ada with a renaming of the first "+":

   function Rplus (L, R : Item) return Item renames "+";
   function "+" is new Some_Generic (Op => Rplus);

The other one I've found is that -gnat83 lets you read the value of an
out mode parameter.

Jeff Carter  PGP:1024/440FBE21
My real e-mail address: ( carter @ innocon . com )
"I fart in your general direction."
Monty Python & the Holy Grail

Posted with Spam Hater - see
http://www.compulink.co.uk/~net-services/spam/