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,d3bcc180a8b0eea4
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 108abf,d3bcc180a8b0eea4
X-Google-Attributes: gid108abf,public
From: "jtarver" <jtarver@tminet.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: F22 completes 11% of its Flight tests]
Date: 2000/01/17
Message-ID: <nhMg4.3374$iy5.215390@typ12.deja.bcandid.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 573947514
References: <387C8859.621FA20B@netscape.net>
 <387CC1C0.4C57E34C@quadruscorp.com>
 <jW3f4.2191$iy5.112956@typ12.deja.bcandid.com> <387CEE4A.3965@Ganymede.com>
 <Ft6f4.2216$iy5.114812@typ12.deja.bcandid.com>
 <387F8E50.11D27E14@quadruscorp.com> <85oclj$nbp$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <387FCA73.3A61@Ganymede.com>
 <85ok6v$iee$1@ssauraab-i-1.production.compuserve.com>
 <3880CCC7.261957BC@quadruscorp.com>
 <oHcg4.2964$iy5.180009@typ12.deja.bcandid.com> <yecaem64cny.fsf@king.cts.com>
 <Dgng4.3103$iy5.189829@typ12.deja.bcandid.com>
 <38835B50.B2EF88C6@quadruscorp.com>
 <G9Jg4.3280$iy5.211569@typ12.deja.bcandid.com>
 <38838D5A.9EB9F452@maths.unine.ch>
X-Priority: 3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-Trace: 2-00188123c1ebef45d0832f3ceea6366b3e59c26006eb7284f4b1
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 16:59:47 EST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,rec.aviation.military
Date: 2000-01-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> wrote in message
news:38838D5A.9EB9F452@maths.unine.ch...
> > And having been there at the time I know for a fact that the VAX had an
> > extended instruction set.  I made no comment about syntax.
>
> It arouses my curiosity. Just read the release notes of DEC Ada 3.5 (May
1999),
> found details about options for generating machine instructions for
> such or such target processor, instructions for the debugger, but - damn -
> no extended instruction for the Ada language itself. Really interesting.
> Is it a hidden feature ?

The Ada language itself does not allow extended instruction sets, as I
plainly pointed out at the onset of this discussion.

> Or has it disappeared ? Do you remember an example ?

Another poster has already answered your question.  I suggest you go to
Deja-News and read the thread.  What the poster implied to me is that the
extensions are part of a tool set now.

John