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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,b9718fc889b868b7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-02-07 11:05:26 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news-x2.support.nl!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!pln-e!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!not-for-mail From: "Zane H. Healy" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: DEC Ada and packages Date: 7 Feb 2002 18:34:31 GMT Organization: Aracnet Message-ID: References: <3C6284CA.8987D330@NOSPAMcompaq.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-145.newsdawg.com User-Agent: tin/1.4.4-20000803 ("Vet for the Insane") (UNIX) (Linux/2.2.19 (i686)) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19727 Date: 2002-02-07T18:34:31+00:00 List-Id: Charlie McCutcheon wrote: > You'd probably prefer a tutorial - this is instead a reference manual. > Note if you look for a better tutorial manual that DEC/Compaq Ada > is Ada 83, not Ada 95 (95 is the latest Ada language standard - you'd see > many new featues which aren't in Compaq Ada). In spite of understanding the Ada 83/Ada 95 issue, I'm using a combination of an excellent web tutorial for Ada 95 that I found accidentally on the web when looking for a simple example program to do a test compile. http://www.cs.nyu.edu/courses/fall98/G22.2130-001/adaintro.html The biggest problem with it, is that it uses GNAT, not that it's for Ada 95. It's pretty basic and I double check against a Ada 83 book to make sure I'm not trying to do something I can't. So far it appears to work just fine with either Ada 83 or Ada 95. I'm also using "Software Engineering With Ada" by Grady Booch, and have copies of "Understanding Ada A Software Engineering Approach", and "Programming in Ada". > Note that Compaq Ada compiles programs in files into compilaiton units in the > program library. This is terminology, but the files where you write the code > aren't as significant as the compilation unit. You can write code for > procedures > X, Y, Z and put them in file A.TXT and compile them. We suggest putting them > in their own files, such as X.ADA, Y.ADA, Z.ADA, but you don't have to. > Other compilers, such as GNAT Pro require specific naming conventions > of files depending on the compilation units within (ie procedure X must be > in file X.ADB, ....). Ah, OK! I've been searching for some kind of meaning in the names used with Compaq Ada. > Sorry for the lecture, but you appear to be new to Ada... Been a long time > since I've explained any of this... 8-) No problem, it's much appreciated, and you've included some very helpful information that I didn't seem to find in the manuals I was looking at. You guessed it, I'm new to Ada. Just don't ask why I'm using Compaq Ada instead of GNAT, I suspect there isn't a good reason. :^) Especially as I've a copy of the public GNAT for OpenVMS that I've got but haven't installed, and as a Hobbyist I can use whatever I want, on whatever platform I want (I just happen to prefer OpenVMS). Zane