Prev: Mine Detector in Fedora
Next: Ada on Wikipedia
From: stefan-lucks on 23 Feb 2010 04:36
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, jpwoodruff wrote:

> I'm a retired software engineer who has decided not to follow the new
> standard. I decided that I don't need a new programming paradigm
> (except maybe for prolog). And some of my old favorites didn't work
> with the '05 compiler I looked at.

I am curios: Which of your old favorites didn't work anymore? Which Ada95
patterns occur in practice, which are incompatible to Ada05?

The only issue I had when converting Ada my own software from Ada95 to
Ada05 was a very trivial one related to identifiers which had become
keywords. (Namely, I happened to use the identifier "Interface".) And one
or two compiler bugs which have gone now. So my impression was that the
Ada05 guys did an excellent job at preserving compatibility to Ada95.

So long

Stefan

--
------ Stefan Lucks -- Bauhaus-University Weimar -- Germany ------
Stefan dot Lucks at uni minus weimar dot de
------ I love the taste of Cryptanalysis in the morning! ------

From: Randy Brukardt on 23 Feb 2010 14:48
<stefan-lucks(a)see-the.signature> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.64.1002231026050.9207(a)medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de...
....
> I am curios: Which of your old favorites didn't work anymore? Which Ada95
> patterns occur in practice, which are incompatible to Ada05?

I can't speak for John, but the main incompatibility that we hear about was
the elimination of return-by-reference. While it didn't make much sense,
people managed to make it work for various things and those patterns don't
work anymore.

We're trying to come up with a sane way to have the same effect (returning
an access value with a limited lifetime and without the need for explicit
dereferencing) for Ada 2012. Hopefully, that capability will allow the
holdouts to come along...

Randy.


 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Mine Detector in Fedora
Next: Ada on Wikipedia