RE: Omission in the Ada Standard

[Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <mailman.3.1064517922.25614.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>, "Beard, Frank Randolph CIV" <frank.beard@navy.mil> writes:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Kilgallen
> 
>>> Robert C. Leif writes:
>>> While I was working on my latest project, the CellFuge, I was shocked
>>> to learn that Jerry van Dijk's Io_Ports package that I have did not
>>> compile with GNAT. I do need an up to date version. Since the Intel
>>> Pentium class of processors and their clones are a very large part of
>>> the software market, the possibility of port based IO should be
>>> included in Ada.
>>
>> And what would the meaning be on some other processor for which a
>> standard-compliant Ada compiler is needed ?
> 
> I guess the same as GNAT.  Over half of the GNAT source I see, that
> is of interest to me, won't compile on my Aonix compiler because of
> some GNAT.Some_Package reference.  I have to go in and surgically
> modify the code. Portability ends up moving from the language
> to the tool.  So, "my GNAT code is portable so long as GNAT has been
> ported to the new platform".  This has been an issue for a while and
> no one seems to be too concerned.

But the suggestion here is that the Ada standard would be platform-specific.
That is quite a different thing than an individual compiler.