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-Thread: 103376,6deb3e1ddefb099
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.234.38 with SMTP id ub6mr15249203pbc.2.1337370338718;
        Fri, 18 May 2012 12:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 pr3ni2283pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Mike Silva <mjsilva@scriptoriumdesigns.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Companies Only Offering Ada-95 Compilers
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 12:43:48 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <3db3e683-8054-4d69-a3f4-8afa0b2b14c3@googlegroups.com>
References: <jp1k2n$ouo$1@adenine.netfront.net> <jp4ih4$srv$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <jp4q52$c0d$1@adenine.netfront.net> <wcc396xip49.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <jp66vv$1jra$1@adenine.netfront.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.35.64.226
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1337370338 24991 127.0.0.1 (18 May 2012 19:45:38
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 19:45:38 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <jp66vv$1jra$1@adenine.netfront.net>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=12.35.64.226;
 posting-account=qZVz2QoAAAAN9WxYp-9jYb7jORc4Zqwt
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: 2012-05-18T12:43:48-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Friday, May 18, 2012 12:13:00 PM UTC-7, Jeffrey Carter wrote:
> On 05/18/2012 06:40 AM, Robert A Duff wrote:
> > Jeffrey Carter<spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>  writes:
> >>
> >> So to recap, of 7 compilers, 3 implement the complete current standard
> >> (1 of them also implements the draft standard for the next version). 5
> >> years after publication of the standard, that's not very encouraging.
> >
> > Why do you say so?  It's much better than the situation in the C world.
> 
> I compare it to the situation in 2000, 5 yrs after publication of the Ada-95 
> standard, when everyone had implemented Ada 95 for several yrs.

Yeah, it gives off a vague sense that Ada is dying.

Speaking of the C world, I'm hoping that with the AdaCore merger Ada Magic will come to support Ada 2005 (or better).  That would be very nice.