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-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,38159b1b5557a2e7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-22 06:13:51 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Standard Ada Preprocessor (Was: why ada is so unpopular ?)
Date: 22 Jan 2004 09:13:49 -0500
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcc7jzkoyua.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <bub5n8$kf5$1@atlantis.news.tpi.pl>
 <49cbf610.0401170627.79c3dfe5@posting.google.com>
 <buc87c$8p$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl>
 <slrnc0je79.hlv.adi@ppc201.mipool.uni-jena.de>
 <budjfo$n18$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl> <budvvf$9al$1@online.de>
 <bue4r7$3n6$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl> <400A9B48.3060100@noplace.com>
 <slrnc0lddd.2bt.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <400BD4B5.6000307@noplace.com>
 <slrnc0nlj3.1jn.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <400BDB7C.40100@noplace.com>
 <slrnc0nncv.4qq.randhol+valid_for_reply_from_news@k-083152.nt.ntnu.no>
 <400D2150.6000705@noplace.com> <nBdPb.5187$rW5.288435@news20.bellglobal.com>
 <400E72F9.8060501@noplace.com> <LNOdncWFbKUojpLdRVn-uQ@comcast.com>
 <100upo7ln5e3k59@corp.supernews.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pip1-5.std.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1074780829 3004 192.74.137.185 (22 Jan 2004 14:13:49
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:13:49 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4648
Date: 2004-01-22T09:13:49-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

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

> "Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:LNOdncWFbKUojpLdRVn-uQ@comcast.com...
> > E:\Ada\Test>system_names
> > system_names
> >   The Available System Names are: SYSTEM_NAME_GNAT.
> >
> >   Current System.System_Name is: SYSTEM_NAME_GNAT.
> >
> > Is there any compiler that produces a useful output?
> 
> Dunno. We used to have additional names in that enumeration, but I believe
> we removed the capability because of the ACVC. In Ada 83, you were supposed
> to be able to set the value of the System_Name (via a pragma, I believe) to
> any of the allowed choices. The best way to "avoid" that test was to have
> only one name in the enumeration. Then, the test couldn't do anything
> useful.

There was also a pragma to change the size of a storage unit.
Very strange.  Compilers are not generally capable of redesigning
the target hardware in the fly!

Anyway, it seems to me that the whole idea of System.System_Name could
never work, unless there were some world-wide registry of names.
Much easier to let individual projects roll their own -- they know
what systems they (currently) support, and they know whether they care
about the target hardware, or the target OS, or the Ada compiler,
or whatever.

- Bob