From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Subject: Re: Is this definition legal?
Date: 19 Sep 2004 12:25:00 +0100
Date: 2004-09-19T12:25:00+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <x7visaa4i2b.fsf@smaug.pushface.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 8119488.4vhKC6FDza@linux1.krischik.com
Martin Krischik <krischik@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> "Legal" questions should be send to ada-comment@ada-auth.org. They
> are the guys who can not only "advice" but also "decide" on such
> issues.
I'm not sure this is good advice, isn't that list for discussion of
proposals for changes to the standard?
--
Simon Wright 100% Ada, no bugs.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-19 11:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-18 23:29 Is this definition legal? Björn Persson
2004-09-18 23:44 ` Ludovic Brenta
2004-09-19 14:07 ` Björn Persson
2004-09-19 20:21 ` Ludovic Brenta
2004-09-23 21:18 ` Björn Persson
2004-09-19 14:17 ` Björn Persson
2004-09-19 8:42 ` Martin Krischik
2004-09-19 11:25 ` Simon Wright [this message]
2004-09-20 7:32 ` Martin Krischik
2004-09-20 13:44 ` Björn Persson
2004-09-20 16:01 ` Martin Krischik
2004-09-20 21:20 ` Randy Brukardt
2004-09-20 17:12 ` Florian Weimer
2004-09-21 7:58 ` Martin Krischik
2004-09-19 11:30 ` Simon Wright
2004-09-19 11:53 ` Martin Dowie
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox