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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: 103376,dce5f3efe158f440
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-07 05:43:45 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!news.algonet.se!algonet!news000.worldonline.se!newsfeed1.bredband.com!bredband!uio.no!nntp.uib.no!gisle
From: gisle@apal.ii.uib.no (Gisle =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E6lensminde?=)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada - to - Perl/CGI translator
Date: 7 Jan 2001 13:39:07 GMT
Organization: University of Bergen
Message-ID: <slrn95gsbq.lpf.gisle@apal.ii.uib.no>
References: <3A5258A2.A1DF0389@hiwaay.net>
 <00cc01c07512$fc01a040$63075140@Cal> <92vk98$9bn$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <3A552875.341E6764@hiwaay.net> <933m0d$pbu$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <87u27eo5oq.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <934kfa$g4u$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: apal-192.ii.uib.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: toralf.uib.no 978874747 14245 129.177.192.27 (7 Jan 2001 13:39:07
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@uib.no
NNTP-Posting-Date: 7 Jan 2001 13:39:07 GMT
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.6.2 (SunOS)
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3743
Date: 2001-01-07T13:39:07+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <934kfa$g4u$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Robert Dewar wrote:
>In article <87u27eo5oq.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>,
>  Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote:
>> Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> writes:
>>
>> > Well the new Ada.CGI package that comes with the latest
>> > versions of GNAT should help break that bad habit :-)
>>
>> Ada.CGI?  Not GNAT.CGI?
>
>
>Oops, I meant GNAT.CGI indeed (Ada.CGI would be an illegal
>extension of the language :-)


In which versions of GNAT can this be found. I could not find it in
ALT's distribution GNAT 3.13p, but I can have missed it. Is there any
place to find the source of it.                    

--
Gisle S�lensminde ( gisle@ii.uib.no )   

With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going
to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly
overhead. (from RFC 1925)