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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-04-19 18:02:33 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.moat.net!border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:02:32 -0500 Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 21:02:32 -0400 From: "Robert I. Eachus" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping References: <20040206174017.7E84F4C4114@lovelace.ada-france.org> <54759e7e.0402071124.322ea376@posting.google.com> <406EB6D2.8030801@noplace.com> <87d66pyw1g.fsf@insalien.org> <406EEC35.7040109@noplace.com> <874qs0zvy1.fsf@insalien.org> <40714C98.90601@noplace.com> <1073gv22t969q5a@corp.supernews.com> <40729B9D.30906@noplace.com> <1076000ef5oj06f@corp.supernews.com> <_-GdndQI1IKMIxzd4p2dnA@comcast.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.147.90.114 X-Trace: sv3-0Q4vLZp/2orRWKwINXqeDgsObvQKrkbomRbcMk0UbeFnSVOshEhby4YxJvJrgNurxYmbq9MAzXe0h+n!hEROOQDXYzTUhKYXl0w3AnNYD02aXlhy0z/teKF/km16DX42Zp7U0QJWIEOwGA== X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.1 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7344 Date: 2004-04-19T21:02:32-04:00 List-Id: Wes Groleau wrote: > Robert I. Eachus wrote: > >> Wes Groleau wrote: >> >>> Would it be worthwhile for an AI to allow a file to start >>> with a BOM and then a comment whose contents are functionally >>> similar to the things an XML first line using to specify >>> encoding? >> >> That is a perfectly reasonable choice for some compiler. GNAT wants >> to support more source character sets than most, so they apparently >> feel a need to have the command line argument. Note that what I was >> originally > > Note that I said to _allow_ a file. I would expect files not > containing that "standard comment" to be parsed exactly as they > are parsed now. I think we are agreeing violently. My point was that ACT wants to make it possible to use GNAT on existing source files, not create new source file conventions. You can, of course, extend GNAT yourself to use some XML type header. But if I was doing something like that, I would write it like gnatchop, as a separate preprocessor. -- Robert I. Eachus "The terrorist enemy holds no territory, defends no population, is unconstrained by rules of warfare, and respects no law of morality. Such an enemy cannot be deterred, contained, appeased or negotiated with. It can only be destroyed--and that, ladies and gentlemen, is the business at hand." -- Dick Cheney