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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,efe03f20164a417b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: ncohen@watson.ibm.com (Norman H. Cohen)
Subject: Re: An observation of Ada (may offend)
Date: 1995/04/03
Message-ID: <3lpd32$12p1@watnews1.watson.ibm.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 100815566
distribution: world
references: <3ledip$a0f@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com>
organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
reply-to: ncohen@watson.ibm.com
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1995-04-03T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <3ledip$a0f@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com>, bill@valiant.gmrc.gecm.com
(R.A.L Williams) writes: 

|> LRM section 13.1 para 10: 
|> "... An implementation may limit its acceptance of representation clauses
|> to those that can be handled simply by the underlying hardware. ..."
|>
|> Now, in the old days, many compiler vendors treated this as a general cop-out.
|> I haven't bought an Ada compiler recently, so I don't know if this is still
|> the situation.

No, market pressure greatly improved the situation with Ada-83 compilers
several years ago.

The language you quoted is gone from the Ada-95 RM.  Instead, we have
RM95 13.1(20): 

   A _recommended_level_of_support_ is specified for representation items
   and related features in each subclause.  These recommendations are
   changed to requirements for implementations that support the Systems
   Programming Annex....

The Systems Programming Annex states (RM95 C.2(2)): 

   The implementation shall support at least the functionality defined by
   the recommended levels of support in Section 13.

--
Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com