From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Ada 200X?
Date: 1998/07/26
Date: 1998-07-26T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dewar.901492680@merv> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 6pdt77$qgo$1@news-1.news.gte.net
<< I ran acrosssome articles that you have writen in the Ada news
group. I am purchasing books on the subject and having previous
experience with C/C++ I hope to make the conversion painlessly and join
your elit group, but a comment you said in your letter confused me.
Using the term "Ada 200x" I have never heard of this proposed standard
your where you just saying that whenever the next standard appears that
the team should add this. I want to learn the newest Ada standard, the
notion that another standard is sneaking up just after I have invested
money and time in this venture and then be left behind with old news.
Please help to clarify --a hopefully newbie Joshua
>>
The term Ada 200x is actually a rather misleading term, which would be better
avoided to remove the understandable confusion that its use causes.
The term is nothing more than a convenient macro for "a possible future
development of a future version of Ada". The name is chosen by analogy with
the Ada 9x project, but in fact there is no Ada 200x project, nor any kind
of formal, or even semi-organized informal activity that is directed to
revising the Ada standard.
The Ada 95 is the current Ada standard, and will be for a long time to come, so
that is what you should study!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1998-07-26 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1998-07-25 0:00 Ada 200X? jlvojir1
1998-07-26 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1998-07-27 0:00 ` dennison
1998-07-27 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1998-07-26 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1998-07-26 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox