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: 103376,16a35419d117fb15 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: fluffy_puff@dsuper.net Subject: Re: discriminant Date: 1999/07/13 Message-ID: <378a9c0e.2792962@news.dsuper.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 500343832 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <3789bfc2.97977684@news.dsuper.net> <378c1097.184220259@news.dsuper.net> X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: d27-ip58.mtl.dsuper.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: 12 Jul 1999 22:06:35 -0400, delphi.dsuper.net Organization: via Internet Direct MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-07-13T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Mon, 12 Jul 1999 20:00:38 GMT, rracine@draper.com (Roger Racine) wrote: >It looks like it is an AONIX bug. > >Roger Racine Thanks a lot. I guess I won't have to play translator. Good. Besides the problem we just addressed I recently realized that the Aonix debugger doesn't handle ASCII characters above 127. I think it's a bit silly to have a compiler that allows the use of accented characters for variable and type names and releasing with it a debugger that can't see them. But then again it was free so I suppose I shouldn't complain. Is there a significant difference between GNAT and Aonix in the number of bugs they have ? I recently dowloaded GNAT but haven't used it yet. I noticed it's quite a bit smaller than the Aonix package, but still I would prefer less bugs and less features than the opposite. I've been told the Aonix debugger also does some funny things with pointers sometimes. Thanks again. Marc Galipeau -- What I really am is "fluffy", no "_dong", no "_puff", no "_woo", no nothing, just plain fluffy.