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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,4bd960829a3eda10 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-16 21:35:24 PST Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.ACO.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!FNOC.NAVY.MIL!mhagerty Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Message-ID: <9408157796.AA779651785@smtpgw.fnoc.navy.mil> Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 10:56:25 PDT Sender: Ada programming language From: Michael Hagerty Subject: Re: Ada9X Features Comments: To: Ada programming language Date: 1994-09-15T10:56:25-07:00 List-Id: On 13 Sep 1994, Michael Feldman responded to my earler post: MF> Good anecdote. I was not on the Pascal committee but followed some > of the discussions. I recall that the standard-making process stalled > for some time on the issue of "conformant array parameters", a seemingly > obvious idea in which array parameters to subprograms conform to the > bounds of the actual parameter (sort of a half-way "unconstrained array > type paramter" to use Ada's terms). This seemed natural to many, > especially since Fortran had it for years. The discussion of conformant arrays is long and tedious with the sentinel issue being that the originator of the proposed standard tacked on a feature which had never been tested, saying "take it or leave it". Note that this was not the designer of the language, but someone who was believed to be advancing a personal agenda. The animosity and distrust engendered in the American committee as a result of this high-handed tactic doomed conformant arrays to second-class status independent of the feature's perceived usefulness or uselessness. Without arguing the reasonableness of such (childish) behavior, I can say from first hand participation, that there were many of us who were badly chafed by the whole experience. I do not believe that this has happened on Ada9X. MF> After all that, there are _two_ Pascal standards, one adopted by ISO > which includes conformant array parameters, and one adopted by ANSI, > which is the ISO one _minus_ conformant array parameters. The story > going around was that the US compiler vendors kept it out of the US > standard. Not true anymore. There is one and only one Extended Pascal Standard. It does, however, forever relegate conformant arrays to second-class status, indicating that they will be phased out in a future standard. MF> And Pascal is a pretty simple language.:-) Looking more and more like Ada every day... Regards, Mikey --- Michael Patrick Hagerty, Computer Sciences Corp. | mhagerty@fnoc.navy.mil Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center | Phone: (408) 656-4456 7 Grace Hopper Ave, Stop 1, Monterey, CA 93943-5501 | FAX: (408) 656-4313 "Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend; inside a dog, it's too dark to read..." Groucho Marx