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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2702c1ed8be62863 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: What ada 83 compiler is *best* Date: 1998/12/10 Message-ID: <1998Dec10.125713.1@eisner>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 420880225 X-Nntp-Posting-Host: eisner.decus.org References: <3666F5A4.2CCF6592@maths.unine.ch> X-Trace: news.decus.org 913312645 6040 KILGALLEN [192.67.173.2] Organization: LJK Software Reply-To: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-12-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) writes: > In article <1998Dec9.092835.1@eisner> kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > > >> I have yet to find supported Ada95 compilers for: > > >> MVS Popular, Currently available > >> OS400 Popular, Currently available > >> HP-MPE Currently available > >> VAX/VMS Popular, Currently available > >> Macintosh 68K Popular > >> Alpha NT Currently available > > >> Giving Ada95 an answer of "Yes" for question 1 seems > > dubious to me. > > > I do not disagree about the extent to which a lack of compilers > > affects Ada popularity. I do not disagree that lack of Ada 95 usage > > affects the availability of compilers. The statement with which I > > was disagreeing was that Ada95 was available on "all popular and > > currently available" operating systems. Ada advocacy should be > > tempered by accuracy so as to distinguish it from the rest of the > > computer industry. :-) > > Short answer--I disagree completely with your characterization of > any of these products with the possible exception of MVS, as popular > and currently available. Perhaps the right characterization is "once > popular, still somewhat available." I do not know what "somewhat available" means -- I can buy a machine new from its original manufacturer or I cannot. Only 68K Macintosh fails that test. I do not see how you could possibly view OS400 as "non popular". It is the mainstay of many small businesses, and has some vertical markets totally locked up due to ISV loyalty to OS400. For that matter, I do not see how your admit MVS as only a "possible exception". A pedantic resort to the Latin would say "popular" means "home computer", but surely that is not what any of us mean in discussing the computer industry. > Of course, with the possible exception of OS400, there were several > validated Ada 83 compilers for every machine on your list. That is immaterial to my criticism of the statement regarding Ada95 availability. I use Ada83 quite happily, but incorrect advocacy statements regarding Ada95 availability do Ada no good. (As a side issue, I would like to know more about the Ada 83 compiler for HP-MPE.) > And since I mentioned Alphas, Alpha NT is a very special case. > There are good Alpha VMS compilers, and there are good x86 NT > compilers, in many cases versions of the same compiler, so a port > would be trivial. In fact I believe GNAT actually had such a version > at one point. Is the lack of demand for that product due to a lack > of demand for NT on Alpha, or due to a lack of demand for Ada 95? Again, that is irrelevant to my complaint about incorrect advocacy claims. Larry Kilgallen