Re: Ada2005

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

(I posted this message on Tuesday, but I don't see that it got to
Google, so I figure hardly anyone got it. Sorry to the handful of you
that saw it the first time. - RLB)

Ted Dennison wrote in message ...
>In article <9v4jsj$bd1$1@infosun2.rus.uni-stuttgart.de>, Peter Hermann
says...
>>
>>is there consensus on the next standard's name? I have seen
>>Ada200x
>>Ada20xx
>>Ada0x
>>Ada0y        [why?]
>>...          [insert your favorite]
>>
>>What about fixing it to Ada2005?
>
>Ada95 was known as Ada9x up until right around 1995 when it became
clear that
>1995 would be the year that the current (mostly finished) draft would
be
>approved. I can remember early versions of Gnat that referred to the
language as
>Ada9x.


Therefore x = 5 in this context. Thus the moniker "Ada 0y" (we don't
know the value of 'y' yet). Indeed, it was known as that (informally)
during the Ada 9x design process. As in, "we'll figure out how to do
that in Ada 0y".

>As far as I know, there isn't even really any movement towards making a
new
>standard. So putting a year on it would be silly in the extreme.


There is a plan to produce an amendment in the 2005 time-frame. However,
these things are hard to get done on time. I believe that Ada 9x was
supposed to be finished by the end of 1992. So it was only 25 months
late. And that's pretty good for an international standard.

In any case, there isn't remotely a consensus yet on what should be in
the amendment. So speculating on when the document will be done is quite
premature.

                Randy Brukardt
                ARG Editor