-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Ada 2022 Language Reference Manual to be Published by Springer

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Lisbon, Portugal, June 14, 2023 - Ada-Europe today announced, at
its 27th International Conference on Reliable Software Technologies
(AEiC 2023), that the Ada 2022 Language Reference Manual (LRM) will
be published by Springer in its LNCS series later this year.

Ada 2022 is the latest edition of the Ada programming language
standard, technically denominated ISO/IEC 8652:2023, which was
formally approved and officially published by ISO, the Geneva-based
International Organization for Standardization, on May 2, 2023.

The Ada 2022 LRM is available online:
www.ada-auth.org/standards/ada22.html.
An overview of Ada 2022 is at:
www.ada-auth.org/standards/overview22.html.

To mark this official milestone, and in continuation of its established
practice, Ada-Europe undertook to support the production of the
new LRM as a dedicated issue of the Springer-published LNCS series.

About Ada-Europe

Ada-Europe is the international non-profit organization that promotes
the knowledge and use of the Ada programming language in academia,
research and industry. Its flagship event is the annual International
Conference on Reliable Software Technologies, a high-quality technical
and scientific event that has been successfully running in the current
format for the last 27 years. Ada-Europe has member organizations
in Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Spain, and Switzerland, as
well as individual members in many other countries. For information
about Ada-Europe, its charter, activities and sponsors, please visit:
www.ada-europe.org. Ada-Europe is headquartered in Brussels, Belgium.

A PDF version of this press release is available at www.ada-europe.org.

Organization Contacts

Ada-Europe
Tullio Vardanega, Ada-Europe President
president@ada-europe.org

Press Contacts

Ada-Europe
Dirk Craeynest, Ada-Europe Vice-president
c/o KU Leuven, Department of Computer Science
dirk.craeynest@cs.kuleuven.be

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

(VAda2022.1)

> Ada 2022 Language Reference Manual to be Published by Springer
> ...
> The Ada 2022 LRM is available online:
> www.ada-auth.org/standards/ada22.html.

This ist still Draft 35. The final version is not yet available. See also
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.ada/c/P26SS3L7kA0 - Ada 23 at Last!

AdaMagica <christ-usch.grein@t-online.de> wrote:
>> ...
>> The Ada 2022 LRM is available online:
>> www.ada-auth.org/standards/ada22.html.
>
>This ist still Draft 35. The final version is not yet available.

Note that the page at the above URL mentions:

"This is draft 35. This draft contains all ARG-approved AI12s. This
is the draft that has been submitted to complete the standardization
process."

So draft 35 *is* what was submitted to ISO.

Randy, the RM editor, is aware that this and a few other web pages
still have to be updated now ISO published the new RM, and he assured
me after the WG9 meeting yesterday that this is on his "to do list".

>See also https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.ada/c/P26SS3L7kA0 - Ada 23 at Last!

That message claimed about the ISO document: "The ToC is very different
from Draft 35."

While draft 35 is what was submitted to ISO, the documents indeed are
not identical. Though I would not say the ToC's are "very different".

Yes, the introductory chapters in the ISO document are slightly
different from those in the RM on ada-auth.org, and there's no Annex on
"Obsolescent Features" nor a "Glossary" (that was removed in draft 35
anyway). All this is due to specific requirements that ISO has for its
standards. There are more differences, such as the ISO document not
having any paragraph numbers as those are not allowed in ISO standards.

But the bulk of the ToC is identical, apart from those differences
required by ISO. Most importantly: the described language in both
documents is identical.

HTH

Dirk
Dirk.Craeynest@cs.kuleuven.be (for Ada-Belgium/Ada-Europe/SIGAda/WG9)

* 27th Ada-Europe Int. Conf. Reliable Software Technologies (AEiC 2023)
* June 13-16, 2023, Lisbon, Portugal, www.ada-europe.org/conference2023

On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 at 3:13:36 PM UTC+1, Dirk Craeynest wrote:

> But the bulk of the ToC is identical, apart from those differences
> required by ISO. Most importantly: the described language in both
> documents is identical.
>

The clause numbering is not the same, as clause 1 has been split into 4
clauses in the ISO version, so clause `2 Lexical Elements` in the Draft corresponds
to `5 Lexical Elements` in the ISO version

And (at least) one bug in the ISO ToC,
`7.3.4 Delta Aggregates` and `7.3.5 Container Aggregates`
are collapsed beneath `7.3.3. Array Aggregates`,
even though the subclause level is the same.

--
~egilhh

Dirk Craeynest schrieb am Mittwoch, 14. Juni 2023 um 16:13:36 UTC+2:
> AdaMagica <christ-u...@t-online.de> wrote:
> >This ist still Draft 35. The final version is not yet available.
> Note that the page at the above URL mentions:
>
> "This is draft 35. This draft contains all ARG-approved AI12s. This
> is the draft that has been submitted to complete the standardization
> process."
>
> So draft 35 *is* what was submitted to ISO.

Yes; I know...

> That message claimed about the ISO document: "The ToC is very different
> from Draft 35."

Funny, when I first opened the preview, the complete table of contents with page numbers could be read. The ISO document had far less pages then Draft 35 (951 pages). I wondered how this could be...
Now the ToC is without page numbers, so I cannot compare.

If you compare the ISO ToC and the Draft 35 one, you'll see that clause and subclause numbers differ. So old references like RM 3.5 will lead astray.

--- ISO locuta, causa finita. ---

> While draft 35 is what was submitted to ISO, the documents indeed are
> not identical. Though I would not say the ToC's are "very different".
>
> Yes, the introductory chapters in the ISO document are slightly
> different from those in the RM on ada-auth.org, and there's no Annex on
> "Obsolescent Features" nor a "Glossary" (that was removed in draft 35
> anyway). All this is due to specific requirements that ISO has for its
> standards. There are more differences, such as the ISO document not
> having any paragraph numbers as those are not allowed in ISO standards.
>
> But the bulk of the ToC is identical, apart from those differences
> required by ISO. Most importantly: the described language in both
> documents is identical.

Egil H H schrieb am Mittwoch, 14. Juni 2023 um 18:11:07 UTC+2:
> On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 at 3:13:36 PM UTC+1, Dirk Craeynest wrote:
> And (at least) one bug in the ISO ToC,
> `7.3.4 Delta Aggregates` and `7.3.5 Container Aggregates`
> are collapsed beneath `7.3.3. Array Aggregates`,
> even though the subclause level is the same.

Not only this. The whole of 7.4 to 7.10 is collaped under 7.3.3.

dirk@orka.cs.kuleuven.be. (Dirk Craeynest) writes:
[...]
> Yes, the introductory chapters in the ISO document are slightly
> different from those in the RM on ada-auth.org, and there's no Annex on
> "Obsolescent Features" nor a "Glossary" (that was removed in draft 35
> anyway). All this is due to specific requirements that ISO has for its
> standards. There are more differences, such as the ISO document not
> having any paragraph numbers as those are not allowed in ISO standards.
[...]

Is disallowing paragraph numbers a recent change? I have a copy of the
2011 ISO C standard, ISO/IEC 9899:2011 (E), and it definitely has
paragraph numbers. (Which are extremely useful, BTW; it seems silly for
ISO to disallow them.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Will write code for food.
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

Egil H H <ehh.public@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 at 3:13:36 PM UTC+1, Dirk Craeynest wrote:
>
>> But the bulk of the ToC is identical, apart from those differences
>> required by ISO. Most importantly: the described language in both
>> documents is identical.
>>
>
> The clause numbering is not the same, as clause 1 has been split into 4
> clauses in the ISO version, so clause `2 Lexical Elements` in the
> Draft corresponds
> to `5 Lexical Elements` in the ISO version
>
> And (at least) one bug in the ISO ToC,
> `7.3.4 Delta Aggregates` and `7.3.5 Container Aggregates`
> are collapsed beneath `7.3.3. Array Aggregates`,
> even though the subclause level is the same.

From my point of view, never mind the bug, this makes the ISO document a
white elephant.

The stability of the clause numbering, and the hyperlinking, make the RM
the valuable document that it is.

Actually, paragraph numbers weren't allowed back in the Ada 83/Ada 95 days.
So the original ISO versions didn't have them. You can use them in ISO
documents now (I don't know when this changed), but you have to get a
special waiver to do so - for *every* individual standard that you want to
have them (that's a recent change, for the worse). And if we added them to
the ISO version (after getting the appropriate waiver -- which I didn't know
about for this last round of standardization), they'd be different than the
ones in the RM (because they wouldn't allow versioning or inserted numbers).
That doesn't seem helpful to me, YMMV.

ISO no longer lets us be compatible with the clause numbering of previous
versions -- ALL standards have to follow their numbering for initial stuff.
They've also changed from requiring not using Annexes I and O (since they're
easily confused with chapters (nope, now sections (nope, now clauses)) -- to
requiring having Annexes I and O.

Bob Duff explained it best: The people maintaining the "standards for
standards" have made no attempt to keep upward compatibilty in their work
(unlike us Ada people). Every standard in existence has to be changed
substantially with each new edition in order to meet the ever-changing
requirements. It's hard to believe that these people don't understand (or
don't care) that these standards are used for a very long time.

Randy Brukardt, Project Editor, ISO/IEC 8652

"Keith Thompson" <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:87zg51hlm6.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com...
> dirk@orka.cs.kuleuven.be. (Dirk Craeynest) writes:
> [...]
>> Yes, the introductory chapters in the ISO document are slightly
>> different from those in the RM on ada-auth.org, and there's no Annex on
>> "Obsolescent Features" nor a "Glossary" (that was removed in draft 35
>> anyway). All this is due to specific requirements that ISO has for its
>> standards. There are more differences, such as the ISO document not
>> having any paragraph numbers as those are not allowed in ISO standards.
> [...]
>
> Is disallowing paragraph numbers a recent change? I have a copy of the
> 2011 ISO C standard, ISO/IEC 9899:2011 (E), and it definitely has
> paragraph numbers. (Which are extremely useful, BTW; it seems silly for
> ISO to disallow them.)
>
> --
> Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
> Will write code for food.
> void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */