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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,959627a08fbc77c5
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,30a9bb3017fa58dd
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: GNAT versions ( was :Ada compiler for PC?)
Date: 1999/04/23
Message-ID: <1999Apr23.172908.1@eisner>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 470133686
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: eisner.decus.org
References: <3718ccb6.3581307@news.mindspring.com>
 <3718d384.254178@news.pacbell.net> <1999Apr20.073527.1@eisner>
 <7fi2k3$lv9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <371C99DD.F15ADC4B@spam.com>
 <7fkkoi$ui$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <371DF7CE.C7D7C1F@spam.com>
 <1999Apr21.142617.1@eisner> <371E2F2A.662C8F4F@spam.com>
 <7fndu7$im4$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <371F8B02.9BD7045F@spam.com>
 <7fomsh$p8u$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <86lnfjx5rx.fsf@coulee.tdb.com>
 <7fq3mh$16m1@news1.newsguy.com> <86n1zz43dt.fsf@coulee.tdb.com>
 <7fqld6$htu$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
X-Trace: news.decus.org 924902955 25016 KILGALLEN [192.67.173.2]
Organization: Digital Equipment Computer User's Society
Followup-To: news.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 1999-04-23T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Reply-To: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam
Organization: LJK Software
Lines: 26

In article <7fqld6$htu$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com> writes:
> In article <86n1zz43dt.fsf@coulee.tdb.com>,
>   Russell Senior <seniorr@teleport.com> wrote:
> 
>> It has further been
>> noted that recipients of the `non-public' releases tend
>> not to share them with others, despite their legal right
>> to do so.  I am curious to
>> know what goes into their calculus for deciding not to.
>> That is all.
> 
> People have many motives for their actions. Just because
> something is legal does not mean it is a good idea to do
> it. Probably in practice, when it comes to wavefronts,
> people realize that the are only useful in the specific
> case where they are necessary to solve a particular
> bug. Note that we do not even make wavefronts available
> to all our customers, we only make them available in
> specific cases if in our judgment it is the only way
> to work around a specific problem.

It seems unlikely that someone with "a specific problem"
would be at a point in their own work cycle where they
have time to get into the software distribution business.

Larry Kilgallen