TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mon, 19 Feb 2001 12:33:33 +0000
TEXT/PLAIN (30 lines)
[said John]

>> I guess the point I'm trying to make is that I don't believe Pascal to be a
>> good example of failure in the validation system due to the limited nature of
>> the language itself.

>Just a clarification: as I recall, the fellow responsible for the Pascal
>validation suite made it clear that Borland Pascal failed in the part of
>the language that was covered by the standard, not (just) in the extensions.

I can accept that, but the point I wanted to make was that thre may have been
reasons why certain standardised parts of the language may have required
implementations that would not have been suitable for the purposes of Borland's
Pascal product. I take your point about the possibility of having a
switch/pragma, but I'm not really into criticising Borland - I think we have a
lot to thank them for.

John



********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender
immediately by telephoning +44(1252) 373232. You should not copy it
or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to
any other person.
********************************************************************

ATOM RSS1 RSS2