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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,78852907f12cca19,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Hans Marqvardsen <hm@ddre.dk>
Subject: Re: ada83 or 95?
Date: 1999/02/23
Message-ID: <36D28DDD.1A5A@ddre.dk>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 447836233
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <36D39A76.FDCAF8A1@GoAway.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: DDRE
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: hm@ddre.dk_nospam
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-02-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Corvus wrote:
> 
> Which Ada should a person that's never used Ada before use?  Ada83 or
> Ada95?  Is there a big difference, like the difference between C & C++?
> --
> This is my .SIG file.  Enjoy.

IMHO, go for Ada95, if at all possible for you.

Clever people spent some 12 years speculating on how to improve Ada83,
coming up with Ada95.

Also, good (and free)  compilers are available.