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: 103376,7f2ce8bda9cae4ab
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
Path: 
 controlnews3.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!news-lei1.dfn.de!news-ham1.dfn.de!news.uni-hamburg.de!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail
From: Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: "Must instantiate controlled types at library level." Why?
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 19:17:50 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: GMUGHDU
Message-ID: <c8b34u$659$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
References: <Xns94E6C22101F54pchapinsovernet@207.106.92.237>
   <1616198.O4tUV8TdF7@linux1.krischik.com> <c837ca$7sr9@cui1.lmms.lmco.com>
 <87lljuvd6j.fsf@insalien.org> <tKApc.63556$wY.36640@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>
 <874qqgpjok.fsf@insalien.org> <3tVpc.34871$vz5.29965@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <c89j7a$41v$1@hercules.btinternet.com> <2004517-94829-360098@foorum.com>
 <1084806067.140519@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <c8apce$t0b$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <1084815602.254381@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de
X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1084821470 6313 134.91.1.34 (17 May 2004
 19:17:50 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 19:17:50 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00
 (9000/800))
Xref: controlnews3.google.com comp.lang.ada:645
Date: 2004-05-17T19:17:50+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:
: Georg Bauhaus wrote:
:> Is an approach based on discipline and
:> conventinalism on a par with language definitions?
: 
: Shrug. How many students of Ada have fallen down trying to
: create an array of ragged strings?

Yes, a frequently asked question. Consider this:
A few days ago an Apple speaker (at drupa) warned us that
Apple's recent C++ compiler (GCC 3.3.x) is very strict wrt the
language definition. some of his programs would no longer compile.
(He added that gdb is not fun...)
 Maybe c.l.ada is a strange place where people think too much about
sound language definitions, and good validated compilers? ;-)