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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5894fe67040038b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-27 11:02:35 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!130.133.1.3!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ppp-3-244.cvx5.telinco.NET!not-for-mail
From: "Nick Roberts" <nickroberts@adaos.worldonline.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Attributes 'Version and 'Body_Version
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 17:51:24 -0000
Message-ID: <9u0o04$5fnim$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de>
References: <9s9iti$g$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <yecbsiekzkl.fsf@king.cts.com>
 <5ee5b646.0111081953.31e2633c@posting.google.com>
 <yec3d3nij4r.fsf@king.cts.com>
 <5ee5b646.0111121351.27897bc4@posting.google.com>
 <yecsnbjdrh0.fsf@king.cts.com> <9trpj1$4e6v2$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de>
 <5ee5b646.0111251830.61aaa6be@posting.google.com>
 <9tsd63$4jjng$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de>
 <5ee5b646.0111260742.2a0d9357@posting.google.com>
 <9tu7nj$4v9lc$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de>
 <5ee5b646.0111261956.3df9b8e3@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-3-244.cvx5.telinco.net (212.1.154.244)
X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1006887749 5758550 212.1.154.244 (16 [25716])
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17054
Date: 2001-11-27T17:51:24+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Robert Dewar" <dewar@gnat.com> wrote in message
news:5ee5b646.0111261956.3df9b8e3@posting.google.com...

> Changing the meaning of an existing pragma, by extension
> or otherwise is DEFINITELY a non-conforming language
> change. That's perfectly clear from the RM.

Robert, your reply is about pragmas. All of my posts in this thread have
been about attributes, and none has mentioned any pragma.

You don't even seem to have read my posts, to which you are replying.

If your replies are simply for a 'vexatious' purpose, I'll simply have to
k-line you, and perhaps others may also choose to do so.

If not, could I ask you, please, to re-read my posts, and then make a proper
reply.

--
Nick