Losts packages..

Losts packages..

[Marc.Bardin]

Hello

- I have read very good form tool in the PAL at "Languages/ada/asr/formgen/form2".
Compilation is OK but ..
It faults basics packages whose names are "tty_io ; sys_calls ; file_definitions ; file_io ; bit_ops ; current_exception".

Is anyone has an idea where it can be found, at least an example on a peculiar OS.
The best would be windows 95.


> - Compiler is GNAT 3.09 with Ada 95.
>  I'm working with Msdos under Windows 95.
> 
> - Marc.Bardin@wanadoo.fr
> 
> Anticipated thanks.
> 
> Marc


--

Posted using Reference.COM                         http://www.reference.com
Browse, Search and Post         Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog.

Sift, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting.

Re: Losts packages..

[Dale Stanbrough]

"- I have read very good form tool in the PAL at
"Languages/ada/asr/formgen/form2".
 Compilation is OK but ..
 It faults basics packages whose names are "tty_io ; sys_calls ;
  file_definitions ; file_io ; bit_ops ; current_exception".
 
 Is anyone has an idea where it can be found, at least an example on a
peculiar OS.
 The best would be windows 95."


These sound like packages provided with the Meridian Ada compiler, a
rather
old Ada83 compiler, that never quite kept up with the times (it never
seemed
to get past version 4.1.4, and never took up the AI that said type
Character
could be 8 bits long (which I think would have been useful)).

I should think that most of these could be handled by the freely available
NT console IO package (which i presume would work under windows95), or 
would be covered by Ada95 anyway (bit_ops, current_Exception).


Dale

Re: Losts packages..

[Robert Dewar]

<<These sound like packages provided with the Meridian Ada compiler, a
rather
old Ada83 compiler, that never quite kept up with the times (it never
seemed
to get past version 4.1.4, and never took up the AI that said type
Character
could be 8 bits long (which I think would have been useful)).
>>


To be fair, the great majority of Ada 83 compilers, even today, did NOT
make this (non-upwards compatible) change to type Character. WG9 permitted
the change, partly as a transitional aid for the transition to Ada 95, but it
was neither the expectation or even the desirable aim that all Ada 83
compilers should have taken advantage of this move.