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: 103376,5997b4b7b514f689 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Reading a line of arbitrary length Date: 1997/02/22 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 220590845 Distribution: world References: <5ds40o$rpo@fg70.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> <33032AE2.666F@mds.lmco.com> Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-02-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > Jon said > > <> > > As I mentioned before, our goal here is maximum functionality for GNAT > users. Oh, I realize and readily accept that position. It may have been cool to have defined some version of this as an Annex or part of some appropriate Annex, but... > The unfortunate thing is the restrictions on the use of Access > being applied to nested procedures. These restrictions were considered > necessary during the design phase of Ada 95, to make it more practical > for compilers using displays (notably Alsys and RR) to implement access > to procedure. You don't _really_ want to open up _that_ discussion again, do you? :-) :-) We all know about the closure stuff... /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com