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: 103376,978f50245fc02645
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Root of a GNAT problem (was: Gnat v3.05 bug or compilation
 problem
Date: 1996/12/11
Message-ID: <dewar.850343396@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 204498290
references: <dewar.849335191@merv> <58h301$gad@alfali.enst-bretagne.fr>
 <58h6n2$2hbi@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de> <dewar.850182311@merv>
 <32AD9D35.4D1@lmtas.lmco.com> <32AE0EDC.4D4B@bix.com>
 <1996Dec11.071027.1@eisner>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-12-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Larry says, regarding GNAT bug reports

"Perhaps cc- might be helpful, but NOT to c.l.a."

I think that is good advice. The one time it is sometimes worth a CLA
discussion is if there is some interesting language discussion that comes
out of a possible GNAT bug. But if you are getting a compiler crash, then
sending a copy of the bug box to CLA is for most readers a zero content
message!