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: 103376,3b21d694de03460e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: (no subject given) Date: 1996/09/06 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 179002870 sender: news@organon.com (news) references: organization: Organon Motives, Inc. newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-09-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > "Yes, that was clever and quite nice. Too bad pragma Assert is not > standard..." > > Well too bad in the abstract, but in practice I expect all Ada 95 compilers > will implement pragma Assert. > So it does not make much difference to users. Only if they have the same semantics. Will this be true? Does the Intermetric accept this? Does ObjectAda implement the pragma as defined in GNAT? Anyone who knows care to say? /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. 1 Williston Road, Suite 4 Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com