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-Thread: 103376,f443c7f5e2728025
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,CP1252
Received: by 10.204.143.143 with SMTP id v15mr143bku.8.1333062448225;
        Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:07:28 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 h15ni64191bkw.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Adam Beneschan <adam@irvine.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Switching to a more recent compiler.
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:07:27 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <26039099.365.1333062447631.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynil13>
References: <22596876.3.1333059140828.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbxo19>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1333062448 11971 127.0.0.1 (29 Mar 2012 23:07:28
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 23:07:28 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <22596876.3.1333059140828.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbxo19>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=66.126.103.122;
 posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-03-29T16:07:27-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thursday, March 29, 2012 3:12:20 PM UTC-7, austin...@hotmail.com wrote:
> I am in my late seventies and I have spent a lot of time and effort promo=
ting Ada through some cryptography I have invented that is a world first in=
 =93Theoretically Unbreakable=94 ciphers.
>=20
> I have used a gnat311.p compiler for all of this that came with the textb=
ook I used to teach myself Ada-95.
>=20
> What I need to know from some young blood in the know is this, =93will my=
 stuff run straight off in a revised compiler like say Ada-2005 without som=
e editing.
>=20
> I want to be able to tell other users whether it does or not.
>=20
> An obvious answer might be =93suck it and see=94 =96 I=92m a bit knackere=
d however and I can=92t get around easily these days so if some kind person=
 who knows the answer straight off could tell me then I would be very grate=
ful.
>=20
> - adacrypt

Actually, if you go to the Annotated Ada Reference Manual I linked to earli=
er, and go to the Index, and look for "Incompatibilities with Ada 95" and "=
Inconsistencies with Ada 95", that will point you to all the sections that =
describe them.

But here's a list, in case it helps.  I extracted this before I was aware t=
hat it was already in the Index.

Sections that list inconsistencies:
3.3.1, 3.5.2, 3.6.3, 3.9, 3.10, 4.8, 4.9, 9.6, 11.4.1, 13.13.2, 13.14,
18.1, A.4.4, A.12.1, B.3.1

Sections that list incompatibilities:
2.9, 3.7.1, 3.9, 3.9.2, 3.10, 3.10.1, 3.10.2, 4.3, 4.3.2, 4.5.5, 4.6,
4.8, 5.2, 6.5, 8.3, 8.5.1, 8.6, 9.7.2, 10.1.2, 10.2.1, 11.4.1, 13.5.1,
13.5.2, 13.11, 13.14, 18.1, A.4.1, A.4.3, A.4.4, A.4.5, A.4.7, A.5.2,
A.8.1, A.8.4, A.10.1, A.10.7, A.12.1, B.1, C.3.1, D.7, D.8, E.2.2,
E.2.3, E.5

                   -- Adam