From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: ada83 or 95?
Date: 1999/02/25
Date: 1999-02-25T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7b2lug$fh$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 1999Feb24.031134.1@eisner
In article <1999Feb24.031134.1@eisner>,
Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote:
> There are a few platforms for which only Ada83 compilers
> are available, so that is the main reason to restrict
> yourself to Ada83 features for new work.
>
> Larry Kilgallen
Larry constantly likes to remind us that there is no Ada 95
for obsolete systems like VAX/VMS, but the fact is that
there are Ada 95 compilers available for all commonly used
current systems, and there are several machines for which
only Ada 95 is available, and Ada 83 is not available!
There is absolutely NO reason at this stage to restrict
yourself to the features of an obsolete language. There
are many features in Ada 95 that are relevant even to
beginning users of Ada (for example, unsigned types are
useful, and there is NO reason for beginners to have to
learn the arcane Ada 83 rules about ordering of basic
and later declarations).
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-02-25 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-02-24 0:00 ada83 or 95? Corvus
1999-02-23 0:00 ` Hans Marqvardsen
1999-02-24 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1999-02-25 0:00 ` robert_dewar [this message]
1999-02-25 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox