Re: Ada News Brief

[WhiteR@CRPL.Cedar-Rapids.lib.IA.US (Robert S. White)]

In article <dewar.846422650@merv>, dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu says...
...snip...

>1. The switch from an Ada 83 to an Ada 95 compiler may involve changes in
>implementatoin dependent choices (e.g. the behavior of representation 
>pragmas). This is especially likely to be so if you are switching
>front ends (VADS to GNAT, or DEC to Rational, or Alsys to TSP).
>
>2. There are subtle changes in semantics, e.g. of overloading, which are
>unlikely to be copied exactly. It makes no sense to have two overloading
>algorityhms, where the only function of one of them is to implement
>obscure Ada 83 rules that have been judged (a) undesriable and (b)
>too obscure to worry about compatibility issues.
>
>In addition, usually it is only worth trying to worry about correct Ada 83
>rules, there seems little point (and it would be tough) to diagnose all
>possible Ada 83 semantic errors.
>
>One interesting criterion would be to see if a compiler can 100% validate
>against 1.11 with its Ada 83 switch. GNAT certainly makes no such claim.
>

  But as it has been said before, just changing from one Ada 83
implementation to another can show up a lot of similar subtle 
incompatibilities.  Try moving from Tartan Ada 83 to Rational Apex 2.06
Ada 83.   Watch out for operator renames and not enough "use System;"'s.
It seems like I have had fewer problems with Gnat vs other "picky/tough"
Ada 83 compilers.

_______________________________________________________________________
Robert S. White                    -- an embedded sys software engineer
WhiteR@CRPL.Cedar-Rapids.lib.IA.US --long/cheap alternate I-net address
                                   -- support your public library!