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: 103376,66383f4b94d281e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: richard.johns@trw.com (Richard B. Johns) Subject: Re: Ada-95 Success Stories Date: 1996/05/21 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 156034035 references: <319a6322.2564997@news.cais.com> organization: TRW Systems Integration Group newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-05-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <319a6322.2564997@news.cais.com>, mdoernho@cais.com wrote: > Hey Gang, > > It's 1996 and there are several validated Ada-95 compilers available. > Can anybody post an Ada-95 success story? (Ulterior motive: I'd like > to know which compiler is mature enough for serious software > development.) Please provide details of your experience including > host, target, rough SLOC count or relative size measure, compiler > vendor and version, and which specialized needs annexes were critical > to your development. > > Please post to the newsgroup so open discussion can follow up. > > THANKS, > Mark Howdy. Well, this post is 6 days old, and there are no replys. Guess the answer is "NO!";-). Actually, in the project I work on, we are still doing Ada 83 coding and going to classes to teach us the differences between Ada 95 and Ada 83. We haven't been mandated to code in Ada 95, and we are not anticipating having to switch and convert all our code over in the forseeable future. Oh well... Regards, R Johns -- Richard B. Johns TRW Systems Integration Group, ARMY Systems Organization "The views expressed are my own, not those of my company."