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: 103376,2c708a8deef60a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Samuel Tardieu <sam@ada.eu.org>
Subject: Re: Backward compatibility between Ada 95 and Ada 83
Date: 1997/09/30
Message-ID: <m3zpovf24h.fsf@zaphod.enst.fr>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 276827094
Sender: sam@zaphod.enst.fr
References: <01bccd8e$68785d20$b229accf@default>
To: "James H. Robinson, III" <jr3uva90@erols.com>
Organization: Sam's machine
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-09-30T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


>>>>> "James" == James H Robinson, <jr3uva90@erols.com> writes:

James> I'm using an Ada 95 compiler, but my class is teaching Ada 83.
James> How backwardly compatible is Ada 95 with Ada 83?

Except for generics (you must use a box (<>) in Ada 95 to allow
instantiating with unconstrained types), there is little chance that
you encounter an incompatibilites.

These incompatibilities are listed at several places. A good starting
point is http://www.adahome.com/.

Moreover, if you are using GNAT, there is a -gnat83 switch which will
put the compiler in a mode that will accept the Ada 83 constructs.

  Sam
-- 
Samuel Tardieu -- sam@ada.eu.org