* '9X or '95 ?
@ 1995-02-27 11:27 Michel Gauthier
1995-02-28 14:41 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Michel Gauthier @ 1995-02-27 11:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
Isn't it now time to say "Ada-95", keeping "Ada-9X" to
denote only the standard re-definition process ?
It would be good advertisement to emphasize that
_The New Ada_ is here and alive. Some people have already
made this change in their mind, but some occurrences
of "9X" still remain.
--
Michel Gauthier - Laboratoire d'informatique - 123 avenue Albert Thomas
F-87060 Limoges - fax +33()55457315
----- Are the messages that objects exchange also objects ? -----
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: '9X or '95 ?
1995-02-27 11:27 '9X or '95 ? Michel Gauthier
@ 1995-02-28 14:41 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 1995-02-28 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
Regarding Ada 9X, some time ago I edited the GNAT sources to remove
all references to Ada 9X, and replace with Ada 95.
I even changed the name of the pragma Ada_9X to Ada_95 (this pragma is used
to ensure that a unit is compiled in Ada 95 mode, even if it is with'ed by
a unit being compiled in Ada 83 mode).
P.S. there are a number of neat pragmas and attributes in GNAT, for a
complete list see the source files of sem_prag and sem_attr. One of these
days we will complete the full documentation!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1995-02-28 14:41 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1995-02-27 11:27 '9X or '95 ? Michel Gauthier
1995-02-28 14:41 ` Robert Dewar
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox