From: Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Compiler Revisions Should go Out As Well as Going Up.
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 13:49:07 -0800 (PST)
Date: 2013-12-11T13:49:07-08:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ce486388-37ac-409e-85c4-a9fe820092f9@googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43e724c6-31f5-4ea6-99b4-f7fd6800319a@googlegroups.com>
On Wednesday, December 11, 2013 8:56:38 AM UTC-7, adambe...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Another somewhat similar issue comes up when a compiler incorrectly accepts illegal Ada code, and because of that, the customer gets their program working with illegal Ada in it. Then they run into problems with newer versions of the compiler that have the bug fixed. I've had to add a number of "compatibility" options to our Ada compiler to get it to accept illegal code that was incorrectly accepted by a 15-year-old version of the compiler. (Or, sometimes, by some other vendor's compiler.)
Yeah, it would have been good if GNAT had altered the defaults (at least in Ada2012-mode) to support aspects by-default. (The use of many aspects is reliant on assertions being in CHECKED-mode, which isn't on by default.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-11 21:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-11 12:11 Compiler Revisions Should go Out As Well as Going Up Austin Obyrne
2013-12-11 13:04 ` Simon Clubley
2013-12-11 16:36 ` Austin Obyrne
2013-12-11 13:24 ` Pascal Obry
2013-12-11 14:16 ` Simon Wright
2013-12-11 15:56 ` adambeneschan
2013-12-11 21:49 ` Shark8 [this message]
2013-12-11 16:04 ` Pascal Obry
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox