Re: Ada Letters

["Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.acm.org>]

Ivan Levashew wrote:
> 
> Ada Home. Every normal Adaist has already denied this site [2]. It's a 
> sin to mention it in the first order, isn't it?
> 
> GNAVI. It is dead! Why not mention QtAda? Not that I was a great fan of 
> Qt, but it would be definitelly a good service for Ada to mention QtAda.
> 
> PragmAda Reusable Components. Aren't they broken on Ada 2005? Why not 
> mention AdaCL instead (or in addition)?

I agree about Ada Home, but not about the others.

The PragmARCs are explicitly said to be Ada 95. Since most compilers still seem 
to be Ada-95 compilers, and the PragmARCs attempt to be useful on many 
compilers, this should not be a surprise. I'm not aware of any compilers other 
than GNAT that provide the new features, and many of the other libraries listed 
are Ada-95 libraries. When there is widespread support for the new features it 
will make sense to modify these libraries accordingly.

GNAVI's sourceforge site indicates it was last updated 2008 Nov 28. That doesn't 
sound like "dead" to me. It is still used and is still an option. QtAda should 
be mentioned, as well. The more, the better.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"We'll make Rock Ridge think it's a chicken
that got caught in a tractor's nuts!"
Blazing Saddles
87