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,a5d76152c5cb8790 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: tmoran@bix.com (Tom Moran) Subject: Re: class-wide objects Date: 1998/12/07 Message-ID: <366b1f9d.16691669@news.pacbell.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 419452379 References: <366B1190.C8142307@magic.fr> X-Complaints-To: abuse@pacbell.net X-Trace: typhoon-sf.snfc21.pbi.net 912990544 206.170.2.180 (Sun, 06 Dec 1998 16:29:04 PDT) Organization: SBC Internet Services NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 16:29:04 PDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-12-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >Could the >GNAT team provide an implementation defined attribute for this ? There have been several suggestions recently to 'use the Gnat pragma xxx' to solve problems. One of the goals of Ada is portability, and suggestions to limit programs to work on Vendor X's system only, should be taken with a recognition of the costs of non-portability. Of course, if something is a good addition to Ada, it would be good for all vendors to implement it - the same way - and then it can be used in portable programs..