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,cb4b02eafef9cefb X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Library model in Ada. was Re: Difference between ADA and c++ Date: 1997/08/24 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 268346275 References: <33FDD17A.320B@virgin.net> <01bcafdf$50784b80$7774d8cc@fatman> <5tnu9s$f6t@drn.zippo.com> Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-08-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Nasser says <> The quoted sentence is somewhat historical at this stage, but if you take a sufficiently abstract view of what a library is (note that the Ada 95 reference manual substitutes the term "compilation environment", for this term), then the statement is in fact accurate. The big change in Ada 95 is to make it much clearer that the library (compilation environment) is an implementatoin depenbdent abstract concept, not some kind of file or collections of files (necessarily). The GNAT source approach (now used by other compilers, including those that use the Intermetrics front end), does in fact conform with the requirements in Ada 83, although one needs to be a bit more imaginative in reading the Ada 83 RM. Certainly in terms of the differences between Ada and C++, the point made in the quoted section is 100% valid and important.