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, MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!jbg From: jbg@sei.cmu.edu (John Goodenough) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Translating 83 => 9X (Was: Re: Ada 9X objectives) Message-ID: <4349@fy.sei.cmu.edu> Date: 5 Oct 89 20:35:40 GMT References: <1989Oct3.200234.25940@paris.ics.uci.edu> <6678@hubcap.clemson.edu> Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University (Software Engineering Institute), Pgh, PA In-reply-to: billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu's message of 5 Oct 89 01:56:29 GMT List-Id: In article Re: Translating 83 => 9X (Was: Re: Ada 9X objectives) of 5 Oct 89 01:56:29 GMT billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes: > If you want to get a good idea of what the likely changes will be: ^^^^^^ > o ACM SIGADA Ada Letters for the last 5 years or so > o Ada 9X revision requests > o proceedings of Tri-Ada and other conferences > o the last chapter of Paul Hilfinger's ACM Distinguished > Dissertation, "Abstraction Mechanisms and Language Design" > > are all excellent sources. These sources BY NO MEANS specify the _likely_ changes in Ada 9X. These are sources of suggestions being made, but no one yet knows what the likely changes might be, because the change requests have not yet been analyzed against the stated goals of the 9X process, which are: "to revise ANSI/MIL-STD-1815A to reflect current essential requirements with minimum negative impact and maximum positive impact to the Ada community. The Ada 9X process is a revision and not a redesign of the language and should be viewed as a natural part of the language maturation process." [From the Ada 9X Project Plan, January 1989] In my opinion, this means the goal is to improve the usability of Ada, and this means fixing problems while not destabilizing the adoption process or the quality of Ada implementations. How this can be done will be the subject of much discussion in the next few years, but major and widespread incompatibilities certainly are not consistent with the stated goals. It is certainly premature to suggest that some kind of automatic translator will be required. In fact, I think most people involved with the effort would be appalled if something called an "automatic translator" from Ada 83 to Ada 9X was required. John B. Goodenough Goodenough@sei.cmu.edu Software Engineering Institute 412-268-6391 -- John B. Goodenough Goodenough@sei.cmu.edu Software Engineering Institute 412-268-6391