Re: huge executable?? - worry no more

[Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>]

In article <3920fbbd@rsl2.rslnet.net>,
  "Tom Hargraves" <tharg@vtcinet.com> wrote:

> Now Ada 95 incompatibilities with Ada 93 has us discussing
> whether the latter is obsolete.

Well most certainly "the latter" [Ada 93, I think you meant
Ada 83] in your sentence *is* obsolete, but I am not sure
what "incompatibilities" you are talking about. Most certainly
Ada 95 obsoletes Ada 83 in the sense that the Ada 95 replaces
the Ada 83 standard, and Ada technically means Ada 95.

Of course, this does not mean that no one is using Ada 83. Just
as the introduction of the Alpha obsoletes the VAX, but does
not mean there is no one using VAX'es, people are still using
Ada 83, and quite reasonably so. For a large existing project,
you don't go changing compilers and language versions just for
the fun of it and because there are some neat new features.
You do it carefully after an analysis shows that the benefits
make the switch worth while. More and more Ada projects are
in fact making this judgment, but there are still many Ada 83
projects around and will be for a long time.


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