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,c150afe4948a1601 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Learning Windows 95 programming with Ada? Date: 1997/12/02 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 294579488 References: <661fdg$sn5@lotho.delphi.com> X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 881084359 2473 (None) 128.122.140.58 Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-12-02T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: tmoran said << Pardon me. I did not mean to suggest it was a one-man project. Robert Dewar has previously suggested, quite reasonably, that people recomminding a product should mention their special relationships to that product. That mention was missing from his recommendation of GNAT. Since my messsage was recommending a complementary product (Claw, which runs with GNAT among others) and I was saying that I had worked on Claw, it seemed reasonable to add the missing information. Since that information was probably of minor, though not zero, concern to the author of the original message, I made it a two word parenthetical remark, rather than giving a history or organization chart or annual report of ACT. I'm sorry if that shortening was too drastic and resulted in an ambiguity that made someone think Robert Dewar was the sole author of the GNAT system. >> Excuse me, but the only message I wrote in this thread (which is you will remember started off with a question from someone who specifically said they were currently using GNAT) was: <> By what stretch of the imagination is that a "recommendation of GNAT"?