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: 103376,74a56083ffbe573d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Ken Garlington <garlingtonke@lmtas.lmco.com>
Subject: Re: Zoo question
Date: 1996/08/19
Message-ID: <321822A1.6220@lmtas.lmco.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 175091618
references: <dewar.840249207@schonberg> <4v6fk7$cpk@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
Date: 1996-08-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


John Herro wrote:
> 
> dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
> > Actually this is nice application for a modular type
>      Absolutely!  That's the first thing that came to my mind when I read
> the original post.  I *think* that's why the original post said Ada 83,
> but of course I'm not at all certain that's the reason.

That, along with the fact that using "Ada" in general should imply Ada 95,
while this was an Ada 83-only compiler.

-- 
LMTAS - "Our Brand Means Quality"