Re: How to leave .ali files in original library?

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 01:16:21 -0800 (PST), Ludovic Brenta wrote:

> localhost@example.org wrote on comp.lang.ada:
>>> I can't speak for the OP, but the obvious reason is that they cause
>>> vendor> lock-in. If any significant amount of your project's functionality
>>> is tied up in .GPR files, then that functionality is not portable to
>>> another Ada compiler. (.GPR files are not Ada!).
>>
>> Of course you're right but I'm only writing very small apps trying to learn
>> Ada at this point. But in principle my objection is what you said and that's
>> why I said I try not to learn non-transferrable bits because it's a waste of
>> time in my opinion.
> 
> But the command-line switches of GCC and your Makefiles tailored for
> GCC are also non-transferable.  Other people have mentioned the
> proprietary build systems of Rational Apex and Janus/Ada; ObjectAda
> also has a different one.  So, your argument is valid in theory but
> moot in practice because it applies equally to all Ada toolchains and
> is not a differentiator.

Actually we could make one step forward and define a
compiler/linker/environment abstraction of an Ada project in ARM. That
would make the gpr file (or, better, an Ada program managing the project)
independent on the target. E.g. instead of "-g", we would write
Project.Debug_Information := True;

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de