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,f4f6a5b783e1150c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) Subject: Re: MI for Ada Date: 1999/02/16 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 445050558 References: <36C365F8.50E84F94@averstar.com> <7a2j8q$meo@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net> <7a7aav$mse$2@plug.news.pipex.net> <7acbdd$316$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> Organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA. Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-02-16T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <7acbdd$316$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com writes: > So Robert Eachus' implication that there has been some > shift in the Ada 95 design here is, as they would say > in the British parliament, a "terminological inexactitude". Sorry, I always thought that the "no unauthorized extensions" was a clever in joke, but I guess it is a little too in for this forum. It looks like a draconian rule, but in practice it is a license with very little limitation except good documentation. For example, it has always been perfectly legitimate in terms of validation to have a compiler which under the influence of some mysterious switch compiled FORTRAN or C instead of Ada. In fact, some compilers that do just that based on the name of the source file presented to them. ;-) As Robert points out, there is no real difference between the Ada 83 and Ada 95 validation rules in terms of conformance, even though the RM wording is a little different: Ada 83 RM 1.1.2(6-7): "(e) Contains no variations except where the standard permits. "(f) Specifies all such permitted variations in the manner prescribed by the standard." Ada 95 RM 1.1.3(6-7): "- Contain no variations except those explicity permitted by this International Standard, or those that are impossible or impractical to avoid given the implementation's execution environment; "- Specify all such variations in the manner prescribed by this International Standard." In Ada 83, these variations were specified in Appendix F, and in Ada 95 they are found in Annex M. In either version, if you care about conformance to the standard you will have a copy of this close at hand, along with the Validation Summary Report. -- Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...