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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!bbn!ishmael!inmet!stt
From: stt@inmet
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Translating 83 => 9X (Was: Re:
Message-ID: <20600009@inmet>
Date: 5 Oct 89 15:29:00 GMT
References: <6667@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Nf-ID: #R:hubcap.clemson.edu:-666700:inmet:20600009:000:454
Nf-From: inmet!stt    Oct  5 11:29:00 1989
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Here is the wording from the Ada9x project plan:

A revision requirement that does not meet the "upward compatibility"
criteria will only be considered if it affects a very large
portion of the Ada community and its absence in the
revised standard has a serious negative impact on application development.

-- Ada 9X Project Requirements Development Plan, August 89,
-- footnote on page 2 (and 3).

S. Tucker Taft
Intermetrics, Inc.
Cambridge, MA  02138