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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,bcdd81f11a99e024 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.germany.com!newsfeed.utanet.at!newsfeed01.chello.at!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Subject: Re: C to JVM, time to revive JGNAT? Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de Organization: cbb software GmbH References: Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 20:13:47 +0200 Message-ID: <1l2508z5l58aq.u50pxrp8ink4.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Date: 09 Aug 2006 20:13:37 CEST NNTP-Posting-Host: a49ce1be.newsspool4.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=P<23>Wjk[hJI7\_^6>c20J4IUK\BH3YB9H:HVol7BNLDNcfSJ;bb[EIRnRBaCd On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 19:01:27 +0300, Martin Krischik wrote: > I think JGNAT, MGNAT and Interfaces.CPP are interesting technologies but > somehow undermaintained. > > While MGNAT seem to come along nicely both JGNAT and Interfaces.CPP are > stalled on a misseing code analyzer/generator for the needed thin > bindings. It is just to much work to create them by hand. > > And a last point: the gcj (GNU Compiler for Java) is coming along nicely > as well Interfaces.Java (interface to gcj) might be an alternative to > JGNAT. Well, that wouldn't give us JVM target, or? Having a naked Ada compiler into anything isn't much useful. Ada's run-time library is the thing that makes it useful. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de