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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: Laurent.Guerby@enst-bretagne.fr (Laurent Guerby) Subject: Re: ANSI C and POSIX Date: 1996/04/10 Message-ID: <4xlok4b3ny.fsf_-_@leibniz.enst-bretagne.fr>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 146727588 distribution: world sender: guerby@leibniz.enst-bretagne.fr references: content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII organization: Telecom Bretagne mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c Date: 1996-04-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: [comp.lang.c++ and comp.edu removed] Kazimir Kylheku writes [deleted] : BTW, I checked the Ada POSIX standard too, but that reads like a VCR manual : from 1984. ;) heh This may be the case for the Ada POSIX Binding (I don't remenber the POSIX number, I don't know the status of this, still Ada 83 or updated to take advantage of Ada 95 ?). But this definitely not the case for Ada (83 and 95 standards) IO where the specifications are most of the time crystal clear (nearly nothing is implementation-defined, except the concept of "external file" which is left to the OS/implementor ;-). The POSIX (C language) interfaces are of interest for compilers writers who have to write (sometimes in a portable way) the Ada standard libraries (based on UNIX/C routines). But as pointed out (I think ;-) by Robert Dewar, the specs of these POSIX routines are not accurate enough (sometimes), welcome to pages of #ifdef. -- -- Laurent Guerby, student at Telecom Bretagne (France), Team Ada -- "Use the Source, Luke. The Source will be with you, always (GPL)" -- http://www-eleves.enst-bretagne.fr/~guerby/ (GATO Project) -- Try GNAT, the GNU Ada 95 compiler (ftp://cs.nyu.edu/pub/gnat)