Re: ADA compilers/ difference between 83 and 95 - The answer

[Pascal Obry <pascal@obry.net>]

Jeff C <jcreem@yahoo.com> writes:

> Summary. Along with my experience
> 
> a) A few new reserved words. (Never ran into this one)

Trivial to fix and safe.

> b) New form required for indefinitite generic parameters (I hit this once)

Trivial to fix and safe.

> c) Packages can not  have a body if their spec does not require it (I hit
> this once. It was always a bad idea by the way_

Trivial to fix and safe. Just add Pragma Elaborate_Body in the spec.

> d) Character now has 256 items instead of 128 (never hurt by this one)

Easy to fix but requires some code review.

> e) Numeric_Error no longer unique. Now renames of constraint error (Never
>    hurt by this one)

Easy to fix but requires some code review.

So as you see going from Ada83 to Ada95 is not that difficult. This was the
design decision when designing Ada95: It must be upward compatible. And in
practice it is.

Pascal.

-- 

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|              http://www.obry.net
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"
--|
--| gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-key C1082595