Re: C++ to Ada Link Problems

[kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <dewar.888636612@merv>, dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:

> There is certainly nothing secret about the message, but I try to be
> aware of an appropriate line between appropriate posts and commercials :-)
> My own feeling is that commercial announcements of new products etc are
> fine for CLA, but one has to be careful about advocacy!

To my mind one of the most effective messages about a product is that there
are ongoing changes to address defects.  (No offense attended; I come from
a school of thought where every little nit which is not exactly the way the
user wants it is a "defect".  Once that terminology issue is settled, there
can be clear effort as to what the resolution shall be and on what schedule.
"Setting user expectations" is the marketing term for one way of addressing
defects.  At the wildest extreme, if someone thought GNAT should be able to
read Delphi projects and convert the code to Ada on the fly, others users
would probably have different priorities -- based in no small part on how
much effort would be expended to the detriment of other efforts.)  When
I read folk fussing about whether version 3.0.11.pqz has reached various
stages of the distribution pipeline, I am encouraged that there is activity
on the distribution pipeline and the results in the past have been
sufficiently worthwhile for people to care about what comes next.

Another category of vendor posts which I find quite helpful is the sort
which describe some little-known capability in response to a query, as it
helps those who do not use the product learn what it can do without having
to get the manual and read it.  (As for GNAT in particular, when the time
comes for me to use it, I do promise to read the manual :-).

Larry Kilgallen