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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,411186037d1bc912
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Some questions about Ada.
Date: 1996/05/05
Message-ID: <dewar.831333441@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 153181827
references: <DqrD2C.Jyr@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>
 <dewar.831213757@schonberg> <Dqvx6E.IIo@world.std.com>
 <dewar.831268468@schonberg> <DqxKEz.Cs0@world.std.com>
 <evans-0505961547050001@ppp2.pgh.net>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-05-05T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


I was shocked to find that GNAT 3.04 did not immediately diagnose Art's
little telphone example, and sure enough there was an obvious oversight.
This is fixed in 3.05, and we now get

     1.     seperate (FOO)
            |
        >>> Incorrect spelling of keyword "separate"