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
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6e70c13232dc4a26
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: logarithms on ada
Date: 1997/03/06
Message-ID: <E6LsLx.JtA@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 223462019
References: <5fcqrs$ius@panther.Gsu.EDU> <dewar.857536154@merv>
 <01bc293c$68597140$d96f1fcc@p5120.bda> <331E0D60.5987@itg-sepg.logicon.com>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <331E0D60.5987@itg-sepg.logicon.com>,
David Shochat  <shochat@itg-sepg.logicon.com> wrote:
>Then you must not have the Ada Reference Manual. Elementary functions
>are covered in A.5.1. I'd say that if the package is not provided for in
>the langauge Standard, then it is non-standard.

True, but one would hope that vendor-specific packages contained
comments explaining whether this is (1) a useful non-standard package
we're providing to users, vs. (2) an internal implementation-specific
thing that no user should ever "with".

This is particularly important for GNAT, since all sources are freely
available, including any implementation-specific gizmos that are not
intended for users, and that might change at the drop of a hat.  I mean,
GNAT users are free to edit the compiler itself if they don't like the
language rules (and they're willing to expend the effort)!

- Bob