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: 103376,8dea6f46dfb95f66 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Environment variables Date: 1996/11/04 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 194377018 references: <55819q$mql@newslink.runet.edu> <327A0B58.65C4@gsfc.nasa.gov> <327DF7F2.2484@gsfc.nasa.gov> organization: New York University newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-11-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Stephe said "In any case, as Laurent pointed, out, it IS possible to tell from the sources that Ada.Command_Line.Environment is NOT defined by the Ada 95 RM, which is what I really wanted to know. However, it requires knowing what the commenting style is in packages that are defined in the RM. I think compiler-provided packages that are NOT defined by the RM should be more clearly labeled as such, to make it easier to know when we are being non-portable." Already done for the next release. Actually this was made a child package of Ada.COmmand_Line with the thought of possible semi-standarization (ACE?) in mind. Note that there is also a routine in GNAT.OS_Lib for getting environment variables, which is more obviously a GNAT add on.