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,c384ad4c89fdf22b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: emery@grebyn.com (David Emery)
Subject: Re: POSIX bindings for GNAT
Date: 1996/03/28
Message-ID: <emery-2703961944120001@line256.nwm.mindlink.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 144592949
references: <4j8ubv$15j@news.sanders.lockheed.com>
 <wgcspevmm1w.fsf@roosevelt.logicon.com>
organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-03-28T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <wgcspevmm1w.fsf@roosevelt.logicon.com>,
shochat@roosevelt.logicon.com (David Shochat) wrote:

> In article <4j8ubv$15j@news.sanders.lockheed.com> 
> "Lowell S. Von Ruden" <lvonrude@rapnet.sanders.lockheed.com> writes:
> 
> > Are there any POSIX bindings for GNAT?  --
> 
> ftp://cs.nyu.edu/pub/gnat/contrib/forest/forest-1.4beta.tar.gz
> 
> Unfortunately, there are some code fixes that need to be made to 
> make this compile with the current (3.03) version of gnat.
> -- 
> David Shochat
> dshochat@logicon.com  shochat@roosevelt.logicon.com

It's not clear to me that GNAT/Forest are compliant with 
IEEE Std 1003.5-1992/ISO 14519.1:1995...  

Does Forest claim to be complaint with the standard?  Of course, there is
no validation suite for POSIX/Ada, but the standard does contain a clear
statement of what 'conformance' means, even if it is not formally tested.

               dave