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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,93a8e26f233f1cde
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.205.119.5 with SMTP id fs5mr226163bkc.7.1334329262671;
        Fri, 13 Apr 2012 08:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 h15ni119221bkw.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!takemy.news.telefonica.de!telefonica.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 16:39:54 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Does Ada still competitive?
References: <2667883.6.1334114293790.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pblw1>
 <jm4p0g$iqd$1@speranza.aioe.org> <jm5qqp$n1g$1@dont-email.me>
 <jm8q9s$t9r$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <7027513.1375.1334319167264.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynei5>
In-Reply-To: <7027513.1375.1334319167264.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynei5>
Message-ID: <4f883aba$0$7619$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Apr 2012 16:39:54 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: bce8a9ff.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=e2S1jIYEGaQf8j24CD<3lPic==]BZ:af^4Fo<]lROoRQ<`=YMgDjhgR2A@5h?dhfKUnc\616M64>ZLh>_cHTX3j]CFROJ0[?@[U
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-04-13T16:39:54+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 13.04.12 14:12, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> anon writes on comp.lang.ada:
>> Problem with 
>> Backward Compatibility:
>>
>> 100% backwards compatible is not a cost to be calculated and weighed
>> is a requirement for all languages including, the spoken and written
>> human languages.
> 
> Read Beowulf or even Shakespeare's sonnets and tell me English is
> backward compatible.

Interestingly, there have been heated discussions about
parts of C99 that are not compatible with C89.

Microsoft compilers for C# version N do not accept programs
written for and using features of C# version N+1.

IMHO, this whole backwards compatibility business is
based on FUD. They sell translators for Ada 2005 that
target a number of programming languages, such as C and
a host of assembly languages. And they of all would not be
capable of targeting a programming language such as Ada 95?

I'd rather expect them to have a shop keeper's interest in not
selling an Ada 2005 -> Ada 95 translator, but to also persuade
the customers to give up their Ada 95 compiler and enter
an entirely new business relationship.