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,d3bcc180a8b0eea4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 108abf,d3bcc180a8b0eea4 X-Google-Attributes: gid108abf,public From: kdevlin@mpinet.net (K. Devlin) Subject: Re: [Fwd: F22 completes 11% of its Flight tests] Date: 2000/01/17 Message-ID: <388274ac.42926465@news.mpinet.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 573567456 References: <387C8859.621FA20B@netscape.net> <387CC1C0.4C57E34C@quadruscorp.com> <387CEE4A.3965@Ganymede.com> <387F8E50.11D27E14@quadruscorp.com> <85oclj$nbp$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <387FCA73.3A61@Ganymede.com> <85ok6v$iee$1@ssauraab-i-1.production.compuserve.com> <3880CCC7.261957BC@quadruscorp.com> Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,rec.aviation.military X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Date: 2000-01-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >On 16 Jan 2000 00:57:05 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote: >"jtarver" writes: >> Nothing like having the rules change to deliver that Boston pork. DEC had >> extensions when their computer became the defacto standard for Ada. At the >> time any extensions to Ada were forbidden. Data General was rightiously >> upset when this was done. I was working SDI in the 80s when Ada became the >> perfered controls language. > >Please be specific. What extensions are you referring to? (BTW, I >was working on Ada compilers in the 80s.) > >> Ada suxs. > >Yeah, whatever. > >-- >Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com >San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> >Welcome to the last year of the 20th century. I would suggest that attempting to reason with jtarver is a waste of time. He clearly hates Ada, appears to hate Lockheed Martin and NOTHING you can "say" nor can any documented proof, change his opinions. I hope he doesn't fly on Boeing 777 A/C as they are as close to 100% Ada based as possible (see http://adaic.org/docs/flyers/boe-777.shtml) He doesn't seem to, or want to, understand that (particularly when DoD "owned" Ada) there was (and still is) only one validation suite. A compiler either met this and received a validation certificate or it didn't. If DEC Ada became the "defacto standard" it was because they had an excellent product and their computers were widely used in the area where Ada was mandated. Of course there were/are differences between compilers. Among others, I've used DEC Ada and also a version of Telesoft Ada ported to the VAX. In the Telesoft version one had Integer (32 bits) and Short_Integer (16 bits). DEC Ada had Integer (16 bits) and Long_Integer (32 Bits). Both compilers were validated and these types were clearly defined in the appropriate place of their respect RM. This particular example wasn't a big deal (nor was it an "extension) as a simple global replace of integer for long_integer and then short_integer to integer or vica-versa was sufficient and of course either compiler would point out the unknown type name. My original cut at the program was in DEC Ada as much due to the excellent error messages as anything else, and then I moved it to Telesoft which is where the one issue (the integer types) surfaced. Granted both compilers targeted the VAX but each was validated and the differences were minor, and those differences were properly documented. IIRC, to do anything other than simple text_io required using package STARLET (which might be jtarver's extension's). This package was/is "legal" and was clearly documented in the appropriate section of the RM in accordance with the standard. kbd