Re: GNAT on WinXP: System.OS_Lib.Spawn raises Program_Error

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

Martin is correct, both are true. The JTC1 ballot closed in January 2007. 
But a standards aren't official until they're published, and that can take a 
while (for Corrigendum 1, it took nearly a year).

In any case, if Anon had originally said January 2007, I wouldn't have said 
anything, but since he said January 2008 (which is off by a year using any 
rule), I felt I needed to correct it for future readers.

                                  Randy.

"Martin" <martin.dowie@btopenworld.com> wrote in message 
news:02d45d5d-1543-4b65-90e0-b5b82eed048c@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
On May 5, 3:43 am, a...@anon.org (anon) wrote:
> Actually, Adacore stated in March 2007, "Ada 2005, ISO/IEC 8652, was
> formally formally approved by ISO SC22/WG9 on January 24, 2007". Also,

"Actually" couldn't both be true?

RB states that the standard was 'published' in March 2007, AdaCore
stated 'agreed' in January 2007.

The wheels of standardization grind slowly...


> Adacore stated that they would be the first to use Ada 2005 spec in GNAT
> Pro. But, other than may be GNAT PRO license users, the official Ada GPL
> version using Ada 2005 specs was not generally available until May 4, 
> 2008.
> Note: GNAT GPL 2007 (released in summer 2007) still defaulted to Ada 95
> specs.
>
> URL Ref. :http://www.adacore.com/2007/03/07/gnat-pro-601/
> http://libre.adacore.com -- 2007/2008 releases
>
> But even with a typo my comment is still valid, Adacore started to insert
> Ada 2005 specs into its GPL version before January 24, 2007 and a lot of
> programmers were using Ada 2005 features, before they were approved.

And they were available on my webpage long before that (last updated
2004) but marked as for the forthcoming Ada0Y standard.

But 'so what?' - anyone using them (either mine or AdaCore's) would be
well aware they were on potentially non-portable ground. It's a
decision for them, as to where that's a problem for them or not. For
me, I wouldn't use them professionally on anything needing to be
released but would consider them for 'utility' programs if they were
going to save me time.

Also, define "a lot of" - certainly not the vast majority of
professional users, who will either a) not be using GNAT; or b) using
a specific version defined by a project at conception and quite
possibly never updated - that happens a lot.

Cheers
-- Martin