Re: When will next Ada revision be? (83, 95, ?)

[Tucker Taft <stt@averstar.com>]

Nick Williams wrote:
> 
> Brian Rogoff wrote
> 
> > Check out the discussion here over the last few weeks. As long as you're
> > wishing, how about merging OO features and protected types, removing the
> > restriction on protected types calling blocking operations, etc...?
> 
> With regard to the former; did you by any chance read the article on
> that precise subject in the current issue of the ACM's Transactions on
> Programming Languages and Systems (May 2000)?
> 
> If so, what do you think of the authors' approach? If not, I hope the
> reference will be of some interest...

We are considering 2 alternative approaches to supporting
extensible protected types, one which is based pretty closely
on the TOPLAS article, and one which is significantly simpler,
based largely on work done during the original 9X process.  For the
"simpler" approach, see:

    http://www.ada-auth.org/cgi-bin-acats/cvsweb.cgi/AIs/AI-00250.DOC?rev=1.2

The one more closely based on the TOPLAS article hasn't made it into
the ada-auth database yet.

> Cheers,
> 
> Nick Williams.

-- 
-Tucker Taft   stt@avercom.net   http://www.averstar.com/~stt/
Chief Technology Officer, AverCom, Inc. (A Titan Company) Burlington, MA  USA
(AverCom was formed 1/1/01 from the Commercial Division of AverStar)
(http://www.averstar.com/services/ebusiness_applications.html)