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: 103376,1e3f2eac5c026e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-25 07:38:48 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!zeus.visi.com!priapus.visi.com!orange.octanews.net!news.octanews.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeeds-atl2!news.webusenet.com!elnk-atl-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!d9c68f36!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3FEB047A.1040100@noplace.com> From: Marin David Condic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (OEM-HPQ-PRS1C03) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Other Ada Standards (was Re: SIGada Conference) References: <468D78E4EE5C6A4093A4C00F29DF513D04B82B08@VS2.hdi.tvcabo> <3FE991DD.5060301@noplace.com> <3FEA5C82.8050309@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 15:38:47 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.3.119 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net 1072366727 209.165.3.119 (Thu, 25 Dec 2003 07:38:47 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 07:38:47 PST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3804 Date: 2003-12-25T15:38:47+00:00 List-Id: I don't know how difficult it would be in reality - to some extent that may be compiler-dependent. The point is, the cost isn't "Zero", the problem it purports to fix doesn't look like a problem - or at least a trivial problem and given the limited resources there are available for standards changes, we'd be better off dedicating those resources to some effort that is more significant. (Analogy: Are we rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic? Maybe we'd be better off patching the big holes in the boat or helping the passengers get into the lifeboats.) MDC Georg Bauhaus wrote: > > I don't think, after reading what Robert Duff, Robert Eachus, and > Marin Condic have written, that we can say this is small/tiny, > that is big. On what basis? Because something _looks_ tiny to us > non-compiler writers? > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "Face it ladies, its not the dress that makes you look fat. Its the FAT that makes you look fat." -- Al Bundy ======================================================================