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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5b0235b23a9db0f2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-01 20:41:11 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!209.81.14.120!feeder.via.net!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3A7A2C91.9293E7E2@acm.org> From: Jeffrey Carter X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Extensible Enummerated types FW: When will next Ada revision be? (83, 95, ?) References: <94c61v$h4a$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <94f9qf$dc4s7$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> <94fdqb$u4b$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <94hr7f$oa0$1@usenet.rational.com> <3A76E923.318F7C1E@averstar.com> <95ctlj$ff437$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> <95dama$1gk$1@nnrp1.deja.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 04:41:10 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.252.123.11 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net 981088870 158.252.123.11 (Thu, 01 Feb 2001 20:41:10 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 20:41:10 PST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4842 Date: 2001-02-02T04:41:10+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > This is a misconception, no one could say at this stage when > the next revision of the Ada standard might be, but in any case > well conceived proposals can be considered as amendment AI's > by the ARG right now, without waiting for a new revision to be > in view. I will not comment on whether I consider this > particular proposal to be well conceived, I will leave that > to others. Come, now, there are few people better qualified to make such comments than Robert Dewar. Nick Roberts' proposal is essentially the same as mine. I don't consider it a big deal one way or the other. I don't agree with removing the ordering constraint on enumerated types. -- Jeff Carter "English bed-wetting types." Monty Python & the Holy Grail