Re: Why isn't there Visual Ada?

[Buz Cory <weltseer@BuzCo.PenguiPowered.com>]

On 1/27/01, 6:47:58 PM, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry 
Kilgallen) wrote regarding Re: Why isn't there Visual Ada?:

> In article
>    
<732FACF8BF7E8D79.8125E7BE5B617E0B.B3DBC49334E8E3C4@lp.airnews.net>,
>    Robert Love <rlove@neosoft.com> writes:
> "LK" == Larry Kilgallen <Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam> writes:

> > > LK> What do you find missing from the ObjectAda product ?

> > A Linux version.

> I didn't know there was a Visual C++ for Linux.

There isn't, but who cares on *this* forum? :=}}

> Linux is a little harder than Windows because there are so many
> different hardware architectures to support.

Actually, several Free Software projects have reported that release of 
a
new version was delayed by porting the product to M$-Vindows. :=)

Further, if you are not diddling with the hardware (as you shouldn't 
be),
then porting to *any* version of X/Linux from *any* other should be no
harder than copying the package (as in distro) to the desired platform
and typing "make". X and Linux worry about the architecture.

== Buz :)

--
Buz Cory of BuzCo Systems -- New York NY USA 
http://BuzCo.PenguinPowered.com
<toolmakr@BuzCo.PenguinPowered.com> (Buz as gen'l Programmer)
write to <helpdesk@BuzCo.PenguinPowered.com> for FREE help with:
    Installing/Configuring Linux
    Getting started with the Ada Programming Language.
Friends don't let friends do DOS; Linux to the rescue!