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
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2807a72eaf629c11
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Samuel T. Harris" <sam_harris@hso.link.com>
Subject: Re: Apex 3.0.0b can't handle dynamic positional agregates?
Date: 1999/10/12
Message-ID: <3803985E.ADCBC527@hso.link.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 535948210
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <37FE1232.EB0AD5EE@boeing.com> <7tt8h4$mis@newsserv.vs.dasa.de>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Organization: Raytheon Scientific & Technical Services
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-10-12T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dr. Joachim Schr=F6er" wrote:
> =

> Robert Jordan schrieb in Nachricht <37FE1232.EB0AD5EE@boeing.com>...
> >I try to compile a statement like
> >
> >stuff : stuff_type :=3D (first, second, third, Others =3D> Too_Many);
> >
> >But Apex 3.0.0.b comes back with an error:
> >
> >[MID] Unimplemented feature: dynamic positional aggregate with Others.=

> =

> Having unimplemented features in Ada95 is not too bad if you consider, =
that
> the Rational Ada83 compiler gives you some benifits of Ada95 e.g. modul=
ar
> types. If you look into the package spec. of system (system.1.ada)  in =
 the
> Ada83 model
> =

>    lrm.ss/sun4_solaris2.ada83.3.0.0.rel
> =

> you find some modular type declarations like
> =

>     type Address is mod 2 ** 32;

This is not such a great thing when running ASIS on code
and traversing to a ground type which is one of these modulo's
and then getting an ASIS error that modulo types are not
an Ada 83 feature! Have to work around that one many times.
However, all in all, Apex is a great environment.

> =

> Even better, the Ada83 compiler translates modular types in your applic=
ation
> SW
> without complaint. Doesn't that compensate your unimplemented feature?
> =

> To be serious: By sovereignly ignoring language standards, Rational see=
ms to
> intentionally bring some C++ habits to the Ada world.
> =

>     J. Schr=F6er
> =

> >The LRM (4.3.3) actually shows an example of this being used.  Even wh=
en
> >I try to use the exact LRM example
> >
> >stuff : stuff_type :=3D stuff_type'(first, second, Third, Others =3D>
> >Too_Many);
> >
> >I still get the same error.
> >
> >There's lots of ways around this problem, but it's going to make my co=
de
> >hard to read.  I wanted the Others statement and the remaining element=
s
> >to be as compact as possible so the numerous tables I need to define a=
re
> >easily maintained (One per line, columns lined up, etc...).
> >
> >Apex claims to be ADA95 compliant, so how can they have Unimplemented
> >features which are not related to the annexes?
> >
> >Robert

-- =

Samuel T. Harris, Principal Engineer
Raytheon, Scientific and Technical Systems
"If you can make it, We can fake it!"