I have to agree Steph :-) -- St�phane Richard Senior Software and Technology Supervisor http://www.totalweb-inc.com For all your hosting and related needs "Stephen Leake" wrote in message news:uwucwtn7y.fsf@nasa.gov... > Tom Moran writes: > > > I recently needed to write some utilities to run under 16 bit MSDOS > > (for data recovery of a badly damaged W2K NTFS disk), so I dug out an > > antique PC-AT class computer and used its Ada 83 compiler. > > I was surprised by the importance of some of the "little changes" > > in Ada 95 vs 83 like declaration order requirements, mixing named and > > "others" in aggregate assignments, limited 'image, and, of course, > > "use type". > > Yes, Ada 95 is a much better language than Ada 83, in lots of little > ways as well as the obvious big ones. But, you can compile almost all > Ada 83 source with an Ada 95 compiler. I think that's a remarkable > achievement by the Ada 95 team! > > -- > -- Stephe