Re: was compiler bashing

Re: was compiler bashing

[ryer]

I truly enjoy compiler bashing.  Even if its my own (Intermetrics) compiler,
I enjoy it if it's well done.

Customer service, reliability, and continuous improvement are very important
in compiler selection.  You cannot find out about it from the vendor.  Though
they may not deliberately lie, they will certainly have blind spots regarding
their own faults.  Discussion on the net is one reasonable source of
independent assessment of vendor support.

However, I note that nearly all the bashing has been directed at Verdix.  To
the best of my knowledge, they are not the worst, and none of the other
vendors are perfect.  So, my plea is for some bashing of other compilers
as well.  Lets get ALL the dirt out in the open.

Mike Ryer
Intermetrics

Re: was compiler bashing

[Terry J. Westley]

In article <20600057@inmet> ryer@inmet.inmet.com writes:
>I truly enjoy compiler bashing.  Even if its my own (Intermetrics) compiler,
>I enjoy it if it's well done.
>
>Mike Ryer
>Intermetrics

I come not to bury Verdix, but to praise them.  Instead of compiler
bashing, I would like to put in a word for Verdix based on my recent
experience.

Disclaimer: I don't work for, sell for, or otherwise have an interest in
Verdix.  I did once own 100 shares of stock, but sold it at a loss about
a year ago because it was such a dog.

Setting the stage: We are building a distributed, real-time radar
simulation.  It will run on approx. 35 Sun 4s and 35 Motorola 68030 CPU
cards (MVME147) with Ethernet and TCP/IP.  COCOMO said it would be
around 125K LOC.  I believe it will come in closer to 300K.  Most of the
program is currently in Detail Design (preparing SDDs for you 2167A
fans).  My group is ahead of this schedule, coding and testing system
services such as network communications, terminal I/O, event logging,
etc.  All of these services have portions which are dependent on the OS
and hardware.

Our choice for compiler vendor primarily revolved around support for the
chosen platforms, especially in the real-time executive and networking
software support.  We gave most serious consideration to integrations of

1) Telesoft Ada and Ready Systems VRTX, called RTAda, and
2) Verdix Ada and Wind River Systems, called VADSWorks.

We initially purchased several copies of Telesoft Ada for the Sun 4s and
one copy of Ready's RTAda for the MVME147 target.  After doing further
work with this system, we rejected it in favor of the Verdix system.  We
decided against the Telesoft/Ready solution primarily because Ready
Systems did not deliver on networking and MVME147 board support that were
supposed to be already complete and working.  For our specific needs,
the Verdix/Wind system was far superior to the Telesoft/Wind.

We are currently using the Verdix Ada Sun 4 Self version 6.0.2(g) and
the Sun 4 Cross to MVME147 VxWorks (VADSWorks) version 1.3.

We have encountered our share of "internal errors," etc.  The compiler
is by no means perfect.  In about one year, we have sent in 5-6 new bug
reports.  Many were fixed with the very next release.  Overall, I would
say that Verdix has been very responsive to our problems and worked with
us.  The problems have been manageable and have not prevented us from
continuing our development.  Generics are handled quite well, including
generics within generics.  Passive tasks (their optimization to speed up
rendezvous) are an order of magnitude faster than regular tasks, but
need to be extended to more situations (including inside generics).

I can't say enough good especially about Software Leverage, to whom they
have subcontracted support for VADSWorks.  SLI has been extremely helpful
and very quick to respond.  This quick response includes our calling
Verdix to formally record a problem or question, have them call SLI, then
SLI calls us back to get the details.

Two of the best features of VADS are the source level debugger and the
make facility.  The debugger handles all our code so far, including
tasking, generics and C.  The same debugger interface works on the Sun
host as well as the MVME147 target.  The make facility is very smart --
I rarely compile without it.  It also works quite will within a Unix
make.  They both need improvements.  The make needs to improve its
handling of subunits and the debugger could handle signals better.

One major complaint we have yet is the size of the executable images,
both for Sun 4 and the target.  Verdix claims to be working on a smarter
linker that will eliminate the unused portions of packages and the RTS.
I hope we see it soon.  By the way, lets not start a C vs. Ada
discussion on sizes of executables.  Its been done to death.  I point
this out merely to show that I'm not wearing rose-colored lenses.
(They're sorta tinted brown, anyway. :-) )

Terry J. Westley
Arvin/Calspan Advanced Technology Center
P.O. Box 400, Buffalo, NY 14225
acsu.buffalo.edu!planck!hercules!westley

Re: was compiler bashing

[Michael Endrizzi]

ryer@inmet.inmet.com writes:


>However, I note that nearly all the bashing has been directed at Verdix.  To

Seeing I started slinging the mud, I should say that of all the 
responses I received from around the world and the phone calls
I received, 50% said Verdix is probably one of the best Unix
based compilers and it has been getting better with every release.
One phone call stated that Unisys at Peole(sp??) would not use any
other compiler.

Because I am familiar with Dec and Rationale, my expectations
are a little higher. I read Grady Booch's book, I took Ed Berards
classes, I used Dec's compiler and it all worked like they said
it would.  But these were expensive products.

I am not going to post the personal responses that I received, because
if people wanted to make their opinions known they would have posted
directly to the net. If I get time, I will delete the names and 
mail labels and post.


			Dreez

=================================================================
=================================================================
               Michael J. Endrizzi
	Secure Computing Technology Corp.
	   1210 W. County Road E #100
	      Arden Hills, Mn. 55112
	        endrizzi@sctc.com
	          (612) 482-7425
	
*Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are not of my employer
             but of the American people.
=================================================================
=================================================================

Flame on Verdix, Any other good Unix compilers???

[Michael Endrizzi]

I have been using VADS Version 5 Unix self-hosting for 7 months now and
I cannot take it anymore. I am up to my eyeballs in "internal errors"
,"database inconsistency","segmentation error,core dump","out of memory".
4 of us used DEC VMS Ada version 1!!! for 1 and half years and I can
only remember about 4 or 5 errors.  Myself in 7 months has found more
errors then that in a Version 5 compiler!!! I am at the point of
bypassing the recompile facilities and building my own Unix scripts
for recompiling and linking.

So tell me, am I the only one??? Tell me I'm not going insane, I'm
almost regretting moving from C to Ada (now that's desperate). Are
there any other compilers out there who's databases don't go south
on a sneeze. That implement generics in a fashion so that they compile.
That has a runtime system without endless loops. That has library 
management tools that don't core dump and spit out Diana trees.


AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!


				Dreez

=================================================================
=================================================================
               Michael J. Endrizzi
	Secure Computing Technology Corp.
	   1210 W. County Road E #100
	      Arden Hills, Mn. 55112
	        endrizzi@sctc.com
	          (612) 482-7425
	
*Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are not of my employer
             but of the American people.
=================================================================
=================================================================

was compiler bashing

[Karl A. Nyberg]

If we're going to have to play compiler/vendor bashing here...

In article <1990Aug9.191734.11633@sctc.com> endrizzi@sctc.com (Michael Endrizzi ) writes:
>I have been using VADS Version 5 Unix self-hosting for 7 months now and
>I cannot take it anymore. 

Any self-hosted compiler in particular?  Brand of computer, version of
operating system, more accurate revision level of compiler?  I'll give you a
dollar for it if you want to sell... :-)

>I am up to my eyeballs in "internal errors"
>,"database inconsistency","segmentation error,core dump","out of memory".

I presume you followed the documentation (and Walt Penny's recent e-mail)
and have submitted these as reports.  Of course, if you have enjoyed
masochism for the past seven months, why start complaining now...

>4 of us used DEC VMS Ada version 1!!! for 1 and half years and I can
>only remember about 4 or 5 errors.  Myself in 7 months has found more
>errors then that in a Version 5 compiler!!! 

Have you tried taking the code you're writing now, probably much more
complicated, with more extensive generics, representation specs, etc. and
run it against that version 1 compiler?  There's no telling how old the
compiler you're using is, or whether it is current for the operating system
you're running on.

>I am at the point of
>bypassing the recompile facilities and building my own Unix scripts
>for recompiling and linking.

I did that years ago.  It helps me out when I port to the PC, although I did
see that Meridian's latest summer release has a recompilation facility.  As
I start to gain confidence in the accurate execution of these things, I'll
use them.  Until then, I send in bug reports.

>So tell me, am I the only one??? 

No.  But it's not the only compiler.  I have found this true with numerous
compilers.

>Tell me I'm not going insane, I'm
>almost regretting moving from C to Ada (now that's desperate). 

... or language.  Surprise, surprise - I even have to work around bugs in
the GNU cc.

This is from mail years (literally ago) when I was actually semi-moderating
info-ada and the same sort of thing started up with TeleSoft.

	We here at TeleSoft whole-heartedly agree with your posting that
	asked people NOT to submit compiler questions/results/complaints
	over info-ada [/comp.lang.ada].  Hopefully, people will follow this
	wonderful advice and save both your time and theirs.

	The correct route to take IS directly to the vendor.  Like most
	folks out there, we can be reached by email.  If you've got ARPAnet 
	connections, then mailing to [address deleted for fear it is too old
	- can somebody at TeleSoft fill in?]

	Of course, the telephone has worked for many satisfied customers. 
	Anyone with a product should have the vendor's phone number
	somewhere in the documentation.  Ours is (619)457-2700.

	Once again, thanks for encouraging the readers of info-ada to make 
	proper use of the channels that vendors have built to care for their
	user's in the most effective way possible. 

-- Karl --

Karl A. Nyberg				karl@grebyn.com
Post Office Box 497			Grebyn Corporation
Vienna, VA 22183-0497 USA		+1-703-281-2194

Disclaimer: Meridian, TeleSoft and Verdix (among others) buy a lot of my
products and services at market rates.  Have you gotten YOUR own copy of the
Annotated Ada Reference Manual from YOUR compiler vendor yet? :-)

Re: was compiler bashing

[Michael Endrizzi]

karl@grebyn.com (Karl A. Nyberg) writes:

>If we're going to have to play compiler/vendor bashing here...

>In article <1990Aug9.191734.11633@sctc.com> endrizzi@sctc.com (Michael Endrizzi ) writes:
>>I have been using VADS Version 5 Unix self-hosting for 7 months now and
>>I cannot take it anymore. 

>Any self-hosted compiler in particular?  Brand of computer, version of
>operating system, more accurate revision level of compiler?  I'll give you a
>dollar for it if you want to sell... :-)

Version 5 Verdix, Sun Unix 4.0.3 running on Sun 3/60. Reports about
Version 6 are not very encouraging.

>masochism for the past seven months, why start complaining now...

Because as it turns out I am not the only one. My request for information
was answered by others that are experiencing the same level of difficulties.
And it's not just Verdix, several others were mentioned (I won't name 
them because I did not use them). 

>No.  But it's not the only compiler.  I have found this true with numerous
>compilers.

Alsys just called me. They were very diplomatic about commenting on other
compiler vendors simply stating that "our compiler will speak for itself".
We'll see.

>... or language.  Surprise, surprise - I even have to work around bugs in
>the GNU cc.

We use GNU cc extensively and have very very few problems. It's an apples
and oranges game because Ada is suck a complex language.

>This is from mail years (literally ago) when I was actually semi-moderating
>info-ada and the same sort of thing started up with TeleSoft.

>	We here at TeleSoft whole-heartedly agree with your posting that
>	asked people NOT to submit compiler questions/results/complaints
>	over info-ada [/comp.lang.ada].  Hopefully, people will follow this
>	wonderful advice and save both your time and theirs.

>  [ stuff is deleted ]

This is BS. The net is a public bulletin board and ANY manufacture
should be PROUD to have their product reviewed in a public forum.
Other forums (rec.audio,rec.video,rec.cars(??),comp.database) publicly bash and praise 
products, why can't a piece of software???  Only manufacturers
who are trying protect their backsides would make such a statement
as above. Reminds me of GM trying to fending off the Japanese by
hiding their dirty laundry underneath marketing blitz's and
voluntary restraints. In the end, the truth stands, and quality
products are rewarded by the marketplace.

I do submit bug reports. If any of the problems I am experiencing
are my fault, PLEASE let me know so I can fix it. Maybe others
went through the same problems and resolved it. By posting complaints,
Verdix is not the only one with it's neck on the line. What if the
problems I am complaining about are my fault?? Makes me look pretty
stupid, too. However, in this case others have stated that they too
are having similar problems. 

				Dreez

=================================================================
=================================================================
               Michael J. Endrizzi
	Secure Computing Technology Corp.
	   1210 W. County Road E #100
	      Arden Hills, Mn. 55112
	        endrizzi@sctc.com
	          (612) 482-7425
	
*Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are not of my employer
             but of the American people.
=================================================================
=================================================================

Re: was compiler bashing

[Vladimir G. Ivanovic]

You know, at a certain point one has to decide, "Do I prefer to be right, or
do I prefer to be effective?"  I think that what Karl is saying (pardon me if
I put words into his mouth), is if you want to be effective, 

	G O    D I R E C T L Y    T O    T H E    V E N D O R

What part of the previous line don't you understand?

-- Vladimir

Re: was compiler bashing

[Michael Endrizzi]

vladimir@prosper (Vladimir G. Ivanovic) writes:

>	G O    D I R E C T L Y    T O    T H E    V E N D O R

>What part of the previous line don't you understand?

I have gone to the vendor. So has MANY!!! other people that have
written me from all over the world. Verdix Users are on Release 6
and it is not getting any better.  Our projects/jobs are dependant
on tools that DON"T WORK. What do you suggest, that we wait for
Release 1019.

Many other news groups use this media to exchange information
on manufacturers. Why is comp.lang.ada so special???  No one is
preventing the manufacturers from defending their product. What is
YOUR vested interest?? If you don't like the discussion, then hit
the 'n' key and continue to mind your own business. 

What part of the previous paragraph don't you understand?

			Dreez

=================================================================
=================================================================
               Michael J. Endrizzi
	Secure Computing Technology Corp.
	   1210 W. County Road E #100
	      Arden Hills, Mn. 55112
	        endrizzi@sctc.com
	          (612) 482-7425
	
*Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are not of my employer
             but of the American people.
=================================================================
=================================================================

Re: was compiler bashing

[John Townsend]

vladimir@prosper (Vladimir G. Ivanovic) writes:

>	G O    D I R E C T L Y    T O    T H E    V E N D O R

>What part of the previous line don't you understand?

and may I add...

	        A N D   T H E   M A R K E T P L A C E.

Verdix (and nobody else either) is not going to make an expensive change to
their compiler just because one user (who has already paid for the product
anyway) has a problem.  They have too many other important revenue-producing
jobs to do that.  From my experience as a compiler validator for the Language
Control Facility at WPAFB, it was obvious that if a vendor wanted to cheat on
a validation, it would be disgustingly easy.  The real "validation" of
compilers
is done by the marketplace, and you vote with your dollars (or pounds,
or marks,
or francs, or rubles ;) or whatever).  Granted, going public with a gripe
without going to the vendor is downright discourteous.  Nevertheless, to be
truly "effective" in a free market, you may need to include leverage in your
tools.

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

                       John Townsend (johnt@mead.UUCP)

                            c/o Mead Data Central
 		            9443 Springboro Pike
                                P.O. Box 933
                             Dayton, Ohio, 45401

                               (513) 865-7250

 "Any opinions expressed herein are my own, and not necessarily those of MDC."

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

Re: was compiler bashing

[Thomas A Peterson]

=You know, at a certain point one has to decide, "Do I prefer to be right, or
=do I prefer to be effective?"  I think that what Karl is saying (pardon me if
=I put words into his mouth), is if you want to be effective, 
=
=	G O    D I R E C T L Y    T O    T H E    V E N D O R
=
=What part of the previous line don't you understand?

Some of us are tired of going to the vendor. We wish to notify other
users about the problems we have been experiencing and force the
vendor to fix the compiler via this coercive action.  I am certain
that my current Ada vendor would much rather port their system to a
new platform to get yet more unsuspecting customers than fix the
mistakes that exist in the current compiler.

Tom

Re: was compiler bashing

[Lennart AtternaesTT/UO]

vladimir@prosper (Vladimir G. Ivanovic) writes:

>You know, at a certain point one has to decide, "Do I prefer to be right, or
>do I prefer to be effective?"  I think that what Karl is saying (pardon me if
>I put words into his mouth), is if you want to be effective, 

>	G O    D I R E C T L Y    T O    T H E    V E N D O R

>What part of the previous line don't you understand?

This is insulting. You have to realize that there are people out
here that have serious problems that cost their employer a lot of
money. Of course we have sent reports to the vendor, however, my
employer would rather buy a more expensive compiler rather than
having the employees working part time for the Verdix cooperation
debugging their software. If there aren't any better Ada
compilers we of course have to change back to fortran (or C if we dare
changing language one more time).


--
Lennart Atternaes

Ericsson Telecom AB
Dep. KK/ETX/TT/UO	   Telephone		 Fax
S-126 25 STOCKHOLM	   Nat	  08-7197564	 Nat	08-7196000, 7080
SWEDEN			   Int +46 8 7197564	 Int +46 8 7196000, 7080

E-mail: ytlat@kk.ericsson.se

Re: was compiler bashing

[Bob Kitzberger @sation]

In article <21105@grebyn.com>, karl@grebyn.com (Karl A. Nyberg) writes:
> 
> This is from mail years (literally ago) when I was actually semi-moderating
> info-ada and the same sort of thing started up with TeleSoft.
> 
> [...]
> 	The correct route to take IS directly to the vendor.  Like most
> 	folks out there, we can be reached by email.  If you've got ARPAnet 
> 	connections, then mailing to [address deleted for fear it is too old
> 	- can somebody at TeleSoft fill in?]

The correct email address is support@telesoft.com.  Phone 619/457-2700.

	.Bob.
-- 
Bob Kitzberger               Internet : rlk@telesoft.com
TeleSoft                     uucp     : ...!ucsd.ucsd.edu!telesoft!rlk
5959 Cornerstone Court West
San Diego, CA   92121-9891   "There's too much caffeine in your bloodstream..."
(619) 457-2700 x163                                              -- The Smiths
------------------------------------------------------------------------------