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: 103376,6609c40f81b32989
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!feeder.erje.net!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!news.weisnix.org!newsfeed.ision.net!newsfeed2.easynews.net!ision!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 09:04:46 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US;
 rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why is Ada considered  "too specialized" for scientific use
References: <hp95j8$i29$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <4bb9c72c$0$6990$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 <lnaathetnk.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
 <4bbb3f22$0$7660$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <hpgp4v$5ui$1@news.eternal-september.org>
 <4bbc4ba3$0$7666$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <hpj7hj$ll$1@news.eternal-september.org>
In-Reply-To: <hpj7hj$ll$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4bbd800d$0$6981$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 08 Apr 2010 09:04:45 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5ab94fdc.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=6oXk16QTeBJ@Y=h<_c3PkH4IUK<Cl32<A4Fo<]lROoRA8kF<OcfhCOKEc[Ii1>5GmNPCY\c7>ejVHEC@aNP:SiXOV]cQGI0@>RN
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9926
Date: 2010-04-08T09:04:45+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 4/8/10 2:20 AM, BrianG wrote:
> Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>> BrianG schrieb:
>>> Georg Bauhaus wrote:
>>>> Keith Thompson schrieb:
>
> (Sorry, I only meant to retain this paragraph:)
>>>>> Unfortunately, the C99 standard has not yet been universally adopted.
>>>>> Very few compilers fully support it.
>>> And this differs from Ada'05 how?
>>
> ...
>>
>>
>>> How many compilers support it?
>>
>> Fewer than the total number of compilers (Ada 95 or Ada 2005)
>> available, TTBOMK.
>>
> Is it more than 1? I don't remember hearing anything about other support.

Can't speak for the makers, and my copies of non-GNAT compilers
would need an update.  However, some hints.  Even a few years ago
a non-GNAT front end had some messages saying something to the
effect that "this feature is only available in Ada 2005";
   I bet that the front end maker focused on analyzing
program text more thoroughly than is needed in order to just compile
it will have some support for the pre/post/inv features of 201Z,
an important addition to the language IMHO.
Likewise, it seems almost necessarily true to me that Janus/Ada
has  Ada.Containers.  This is still speculation but will
picture the Ada situation quite similar to what you find
to be the case for other multi-vendor languages.