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: 103376,26f0ce9469ee1122
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Subject: Re: Where are the Ada 95 repositories?
Date: 1997/04/18
Message-ID: <EACHUS.97Apr18190325@spectre.mitre.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 235892463
References: <3356534D.E65C2DDE@etsu-tn.edu>
Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-18T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <3356534D.E65C2DDE@etsu-tn.edu> "Eric B. Lemings" <zebl1@etsu-tn.edu> writes:

  > A lot of the general packages are now part of the standard Ada 95
  > library. That's not what I call reusable.

  Gee!  That would seem to me to be the ultimate in re-use.  The
packages were found to be so ubiquitous that they are now in the
standard.

  > Where are the more general, more useful repositories written in
  > Ada 95?

    Being written...  There are a few out there, and I'll let the
appropriate people speak for themselves.  But real reusable components
are written with a through knowledge of the language and how it should
be used, and are well tested before being released.

    I have a couple that I'd like to release, but right now they work
with one known compiler and at that, only the most recent version.
(Actually one works on gnat 3.07 or later, the other requires 3.09.)

    So it is still a little early yet.
--

					Robert I. Eachus

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