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: 103376,9e2776c05028676e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Why Ada is not the Commercial Lang of Choice
Date: 1997/06/24
Message-ID: <dewar.867185530@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 252319359
References: <33A7FBFF.29D2@mitre.org> <EC471t.Ltp@thomsoft.com>
 <dewar.866898018@merv> <33B02457.2B64@lmco.com>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-06-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Ken said

<<Of course, some of us still use 16-bit machines with segmentation (e.g.
MIL-STD-1750), but since by and large you can't get Ada 95 on such
machines,
it doesn't cause problems for Ada vendors.
>>

Actually there are Ada 95 compilers for this machine, and no doubt there are
other strange machines around where the modular representation for
Address does not make sense. But I would not exactly call these modern
machines :-) And my original note was hedged precisely because there are
still some machines like this around!