From: Howard.Gilbert@yale.edu
Subject: Re: ADA-9x done? Any good PC compilers?
Date: 13 Jan 1995 14:02:04 GMT
Date: 1995-01-13T14:02:04+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3f614s$5ie@news.ycc.yale.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 3f49k3$kfp@gnat.cs.nyu.edu
In <3f49k3$kfp@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>, dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
>
>Actually it was not technically a bug, since compilers are allowed to
>take longer than the minimum for a delay, if you had waited 25,000 years,
>the delay would have expired :-) :-)
Now you are beginning to sound like Microsoft.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1995-01-13 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1995Jan11.154250@clstac>
1995-01-12 22:14 ` ADA-9x done? Any good PC compilers? Robert Dewar
1995-01-13 14:02 ` Howard.Gilbert [this message]
[not found] ` <3f9m5u$rc8@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
[not found] ` <EACHUS.95Jan17120531@spectre.mitre.org>
1995-01-18 23:17 ` Robert Dewar
1995-01-19 19:08 ` Robert I. Eachus
1995-01-21 5:31 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox