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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7f9c4ba3b0dc13ca
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-12-17 15:15:54 PST
Path: 
 bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!cmcl2!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!nobody
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Addressing functions
Date: 17 Dec 1994 12:32:54 -0500
Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
Message-ID: <3cv7c6$nnb@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
References: <3citrc$bb5@earth.usa.net>
 <EACHUS.94Dec13101448@spectre.mitre.org> <evans-161294091837@evans.pgh.pa.us>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gnat.cs.nyu.edu
Date: 1994-12-17T12:32:54-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Moreover, Art reads into B.1(11) a requirement in Ada 95 to support
pragma Interface (Ada,...)

I don't see any such requirement. The sentence in 11 merely says that
the convention name Ada is not implementation dependent, it does not
say that you have to support it. Obviously you can't support pragma
Intrinsic for arbitrary entities, so clearly the implementation can
decide in general what pragma Import's to allow (there is implementation
advice in para 41, but that is only advice).