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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.236.96.138 with SMTP id r10mr876136yhf.12.1392912679174;
 Thu, 20 Feb 2014 08:11:19 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!k15no24823246qaq.0!news-out.google.com!dr7ni1480qab.1!nntp.google.com!peer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Pass a serial port as user data in a GTK callback handler?
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:11:13 -0500
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcc7g8pzrvi.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <bmabpcFq9c8U1@mid.individual.net>
 <050a1b45-c312-4fff-96f9-7c3d01466500@googlegroups.com>
 <58fb9abc-1892-4a36-9895-c494dbc727c9@googlegroups.com>
 <wcc38jhl93l.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <le0v9m$bk1$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <wcc8ut64uao.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <le3ij5$ipl$1@loke.gir.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: pcls7.std.com 1392912677 12703 192.74.137.71 (20 Feb 2014 16:11:17
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 16:11:17 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (irix)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LnC7xA9fds2Y4v8+ZUHaDc4UdOk=
X-Received-Bytes: 1844
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1306262986
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:185035
Date: 2014-02-20T11:11:13-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> writes:

> Yeah, you got rid of the term collection in Ada 95, and we just now put it 
> back in Ada 2012. So I think you were confused for a fairly long moment - a 
> bit under 17 years. :-)

;-)

No, not that long.  I don't remember when I was confused, and when
I wised up, but I just didn't bother to reinstate "collection"
when I wised up.

> You'd be wrong about that. They tried that, and no existing C code 
> (especially Unix) would work.

Interesting.  Such C code is broken (or at least deliberately written
to be nonportable).  It doesn't surprise me.

> But it sure would help if named and anonymous access used the same syntax. 
> :-)

Agreed.

- Bob