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: 103376,14755b2ae766bc3e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Joe Colloca <jcolloca@thomsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Ada 95 Validated on HP
Date: 1996/08/06
Message-ID: <3206A5DD.3F@thomsoft.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 172394128
sender: news@thomsoft.com (USENET News Admin @flash)
x-nntp-posting-host: 136.175.0.137
references: <31F95976.4218@thomsoft.com>
 <31FE5016.31DFF4F5@escmail.orl.mmc.com> <32026B7C.37C8@thomsoft.com>
 <dewar.839077263@schonberg>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: Thomson Software Products, San Diego, CA, USA
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6Gold (Win16; I)
Date: 1996-08-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> A note on annex terminology
> There are two quite different kinds of annexes in the RM. Some annexes
> are part of the core, and I have not heard the term "core annexe" as in
> the above reply, before, but that is a useful term. All of the annexes
> A,B and J are in this category
 [snip]

There had been some discussion on another thread regarding the use of
"Annex" when referring to Annex A and B because they are actually part
of the Core Language.. hence the term "Core Annex", somewhat of an
oxymoron, but... :-)

>Consequently, you really have to look carefully at 2.0
> validations. Some validated compilers passed 100% of the Ada 95 core tests
> and some passed 0%.
 [snip]

Absolutely correct - we've been stressing this point as well...ObjectAda
7.x compilers validated under 2.0 or 2.01 pass 100% Ada95 tests.
Optional Annex support is, of course, planned for the 7.x series and
beyond...


Joe Colloca