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: 103376,691bbbf0ab0cc67e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: [Q] Returning Strings From A Function
Date: 1997/04/06
Message-ID: <dewar.860338656@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 231097737
References: <33454165.1658515@news.demon.co.uk>
 <33468b81.762963@news.demon.co.uk> <dewar.860265459@merv>
 <33478738.2129057@news.demon.co.uk>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


John says

<<Yes, but in all your postings I have noticed you interpret Ada to mean
Ada95, and in that language I believe I can do what I'm trying to do.
Ada83, however does not let me, but I can get by without doing that.
As someone mentioned, string handling in Ada83 has its little
annoyances, and its obvious there has been major revisions placed in
the Ada95 definition.>>


That's a bit confused. There are no real language features added to
Ada 95, just some standard libraries. In Ada 83 you could

(a) code these yourself
(b) use the ADAR components which mimic the Ada 95 facilities in Ada 83

But you can certainly do what you want. Yes, it is more convenient in
Ada 95 to have those right at hand, but a real life Ada program ends up
reusing all sorts of useful Ada library components that are not in the
Ada 95 RM.

No one sits around saying "gosh in Ada 83, it is impossible to write a dot
product, there is no built in feature in the language -- they just program
a loop!" Well we have the same situation here, you can do what you want
perfectly well in Ada 83, you just have to do some programming.

If you find that programming too burdensome -- then all the more reason
to switch to Ada 95 one of these days :-)