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,f034f4cba8f609e8
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Processors with Ada support.
Date: 1997/01/25
Message-ID: <dewar.854210551@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 212166515
references: <1997Jan15.144618.1@corning.com> <32DE39BC.41C6@Rational.COM>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-01-25T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Jerome said

"Have a look at the "Compilers & Validation" part of:
http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/"

That's fine if what you want is compilers that are officially validated,
but may be misleading in two respects:


1.  There are validated Ada 95 compilers that implement none of the
	Ada 95 features (since ACVC 2.0 did not require such)

2.  There are complete Ada 95 implementations that are not yet validated

So, it depends what you want. if you need a validated compiler, then this
list is the one to look at. If you need an Ada 95 compiler, it may not be
the whole story!