From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,df1a7f1c3c3bc77e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Maciej Sobczak Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: An Ada Advice Inquiry Date: 7 May 2007 06:00:30 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1178542830.662912.295270@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> References: <1178448459.256329.28590@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <1178480316.415370.194260@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> <463ed042$1@news.post.ch> <1178527820.949652.143060@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> <1g1r9ddu19ka7$.1kq3tc2btm98o.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 137.138.37.241 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1178542832 8348 127.0.0.1 (7 May 2007 13:00:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 13:00:32 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <1g1r9ddu19ka7$.1kq3tc2btm98o.dlg@40tude.net> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.10) Gecko/20070228 Red Hat/1.5.0.10-0.1.slc3 Firefox/1.5.0.10,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=137.138.37.241; posting-account=Ch8E9Q0AAAA7lJxCsphg7hBNIsMsP4AE Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15616 Date: 2007-05-07T06:00:30-07:00 List-Id: On 7 Maj, 11:40, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" wrote: > > I believe you entirely that you had this problem - but today, at least > > three generations of compilers later, it's hardly a convincing > > argument. > > Huh, have you seen Borland Builder 2006? No, but I've heard very bad stories about it and I wonder why the hell there is still any market for this. Do we really talk about *new projects*, or continuation of legacy code with vendor lock-in? What about MSVC++8.0? g++4? Intel? Comeau? > Recently we enjoyed mixing Visual Studio 2005 and Borland Builder 2006. It > was insightful... I can imagine - mixing one C++ compiler with something that is not a C+ + compiler must hurt. Still, almost every reasonable platform can be targeted with just two compilers: recent MSVC++ and recent g++. I've never had any serious issues here, apart from the fact that MSVC++ does not implement C99 additions. But formally, it doesn't have to - it's a strictly C++98 compiler. The difference between Ada and C++ is that with C++ we have a set of compilers to choose from, so nobody is forcing you to use the worst one (unless you got locked-in, but then it's only your fault). With Ada there is a set of versions of GNAT that are "somewhere" between Ada95 and Ada2005, where the exact meaning of "somewhere" is to be discovered by the user. -- Maciej Sobczak http://www.msobczak.com/