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: 103376,47bd5b7b3b898723
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Form feed comment for pragma Page
Date: 1996/06/05
Message-ID: <dewar.834030629@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 158762396
references: <dewar.833858713@schonberg>
 <4p5bcq$h1s$1@mhade.production.compuserve.com>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-06-05T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Rex said

"Note that there is a slight difference between Ada 83 and 95
concerning the definition of a comment.  It appeared to me
that the intent was to allow almost any character code to
be in the comment including nulls and other items not
normally allowed."

No difference between Ada 83 and Ada 95 here, an approved AI allowed
(though to be precise did not require) this in Ada 83. The Ada 95
definition is merely a restatement of the conclusions of this AI.

Note that ending a comment with a form feed is of course fine, since
that is the end of a logcal line anyway.