TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Colin Paul Gloster <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 18 Jun 2001 04:27:51 -0400
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (48 lines)
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Michael Feldman wrote:
"Stephane et al,

See

http://cui.unige.ch/db-research/Enseignement/analyseinfo/Ada95/BNFindex.html

for a nice text and graphic rendering of Ada 95 BNF.

They don't have an Ada 83 one there, but syntax-wise there are few
differences. General access types, protected types, and tagged types
are the ones that come to mind. The syntactic leap is _much_ smaller
than from C to C++, for example."

However Ada 83 and Ada 95 are not the same. To read the email
lists; webpages; and newsgroup one would strain by and large to see Ada 83
but it is still being used.

Mike Feldman

"Hello everyone,

Could I please be pointer to a website and/or a good PDF file that explains
in details the Ada 83 and 95 Grammar in B.N.F. format?

I prefere Ada 95, but if there is only Ada 83 B.N.F. Existing out there, so
be it.

Thank you everyone

Stephane Richard
Software Developer

--
Stephane Richard
Software Developer
[log in to unmask]

Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net"

If you prefer and are happily using Ada 95 I do not want to deter you from
that. However I will still publicise an Ada 83 B.N.F. file on the
Internet: http://www.32sixteen.com/ada83.y and send comments (if any) to
[log in to unmask]

Glad you already got the Ada 95 material you wanted.
Colin Paul Gloster

ATOM RSS1 RSS2