Re: Ada Operators in 9x

[eachus@mitre-bedford.arpa (Robert I. Eachus)]

In article <1993Jul08.221838.35531@source.asset.com> vand@source.asset.com (Lau
rence VanDolsen) writes:

  > No, it won't be there.  All of us with two words in our last name would
  > like that character also.  I t would significantly reduce erroneous
  > sorts and redundant mailings of junk catalogs.

    Actually, the option to allow this is there, it is not required to
be supported...  This applies to Ada 83 and Ada 9X.  Personally I
would find code with NBSP and spaces having different effects
intolerable, but if you think you would like it go ahead.

    The current position is that compilers must have a mode in which
the input maps to the ACSII character set (which is now the same as
Latin-1) but compilers are free to support other modes.  For example
you would really want an IBM-PC compiler to have a moode which
supports the (psuedo)standard upper-page characters, or if you live in
Turkey, you would want a compiler that allowed dotless i's. Of course
such a source program will not be easily portable.  The GNAT compiler
will accept many mappings as command line options.




--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...