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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1d52a75fd633fefc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-24 11:41:45 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.iac.net!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newscon04.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsmst01!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr16.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Ken Garlington" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <3A844255.24A4DBA3@lmco.com> <3A866B28.CE67B4A0@yyy.zzz> <3A8C6AA3.3F90043D@lmco.com> <%Wvk6.102$aw5.380@www.newsranger.com> <9713k0$6ao$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <976jbu$3p4$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3A97DFCD.3010503@acm.org> <3A9809FD.D9194D0E@acm.org> Subject: Re: Ada to C++ translator? Organization: Prodigy (ex-FlashNet) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.67.100.15 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr16.news.prodigy.com 983043537 6207069 65.67.100.15 (Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:38:57 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 14:38:57 EST Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:38:57 GMT Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5514 Date: 2001-02-24T19:38:57+00:00 List-Id: "Marin David Condic" wrote in message news:3A9809FD.D9194D0E@acm.org... : Thanks for the enlightment. I think my only point was that subsets of Ada existed : back in '83 (or thereabouts) so there isn't something new allowed in Ada that just : became available. As I recall - some of the Ada subset compilers also had the word : "Ada" in them somewhere - nothing wrong with that. I recall the DoD simply having a : concern that someone could start peddaling what they called "Ada" only without a : full implementation. (There were dozens of compilers at the time that called : themselves "Pascal" with no two exactly alike. So what did it mean to call a : compiler a "Pascal" compiler?) They wanted to be sure that if someone sold you a : compiler and called it "Ada" that it in fact implemented the whole of the language. : I don't think the situation is much different today - just maybe not as formal. : People still expect that if you label a compiler "Ada" that it has run the : validation suite and implements the full language. With a caveat that the term "full language" could mean (a) the Ada83 dialect, (b) some subset of the Ada95 annexes, or even (c) known cases where a validation test fails. The reality is that a vendor can hopefully tell you which tests will pass for a given environment (compiler switches, etc.), as well as any known deficiencies. You may or may not be able to derive something useful from that information with regard to how much of the language is actually implemented.