TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 19 Feb 2001 16:54:57 -0500
X-To:
Reply-To:
"W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (15 lines)
> Yes it did. It's the ISO 10206 standard (aka 'extended pascal'). Which
> includes seperately compilable modules (with initinializing, renamings, etc),
> strings, real file handling, system library, external interfacing, and lots
> more. There is a commercial validation suite and procedure and there are
> a number of validated commercial (and free, like FreePascal) compilers
> available for the popular platforms.

So, aside from syntax, how does it differ from Ada?

(not too detailed, please...)

--
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau

ATOM RSS1 RSS2