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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,c26a0bb87e0a1da4
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!nuzba.szn.dk!news.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Conversion from Ada95 to Ada05 (Was: Does ada have a sscanf
 equivalent?)
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 13:48:33 -0600
Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen
Message-ID: <hm1bei$ikq$1@munin.nbi.dk>
References: 
 <5e46b3e8-f7ea-45a6-a884-6882f6ec8295@c16g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
  <e00ef618-4980-45fb-aa35-52c513fe178a@b5g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
  <8432d8b0-acd0-439f-8366-d72f53571f90@k18g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
 <bdcf2cf7-312e-469a-9085-ef647f69f894@g8g2000pri.googlegroups.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.64.1002231026050.9207@medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net
X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1266954514 19098 69.95.181.76 (23 Feb 2010 19:48:34 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 19:48:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9296
Date: 2010-02-23T13:48:33-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

<stefan-lucks@see-the.signature> wrote in message 
news:Pine.LNX.4.64.1002231026050.9207@medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de...
...
> I am curios: Which of your old favorites didn't work anymore? Which Ada95
> patterns occur in practice, which are incompatible to Ada05?

I can't speak for John, but the main incompatibility that we hear about was 
the elimination of return-by-reference. While it didn't make much sense, 
people managed to make it work for various things and those patterns don't 
work anymore.

We're trying to come up with a sane way to have the same effect (returning 
an access value with a limited lifetime and without the need for explicit 
dereferencing) for Ada 2012. Hopefully, that capability will allow the 
holdouts to come along...

                          Randy.