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,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1aa4222a49de9a46
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Tips for conversion from Apex to GNAT
Date: 1999/12/26
Message-ID: <845nna$pdu$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 565058956
References: <38609E9C.B75C9962@rdel.co.uk> <83ufng$a9h$1@pyrite.mv.net>
 <s6ccap5h45153@corp.supernews.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x32.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Sun Dec 26 18:49:19 1999 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-12-26T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <s6ccap5h45153@corp.supernews.com>,
  "Arthur Schwarz" <aschwarz@acm.org> wrote:
> The major problem that I
> recall was the placement of one of the pragma's. RATIONAL
places it between
> the package start and the end package, GNAT places it after
> the end package.


Certainly if this was the "major problem", then you had highly
portable code. In our experience the major impediment to porting
between *any* two Ada compilers is legitimate implementation
dependencies.

However the pragma placement cannot be an ID, and must represent
a bug in one or the other compiler, so you might want to give
more details on this.



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.