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: 103376,c239006be68d86aa
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Theodore E. Dennison" <dennison@escmail.orl.mmc.com>
Subject: Re: GNAT on Win 95
Date: 1996/06/11
Message-ID: <31BD9FAF.15FB7483@escmail.orl.mmc.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 159656345
references: <9606101448.AA26858@eight-ball>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: Lockheed Martin Information Systems
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3_U1 sun4m)
Date: 1996-06-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Bob Crispen wrote:
> While I'm sort of on the same topic, I hope the relevant folks are
> paying attention to the Win32 API that's in the process of coming
> out, I believe through the Cygnus GnuWin32 folks.  There's an opportunity
> for some synergy here, I believe.  I apologize for not knowing the
> name of the author; this represents a tremendous amount of work.

Hmm. I know there are already Win32 bindings for GNAT. I take it you
are referring to some sort of effort to make gcc-native Win32 DLL's 
and .h's? That would indeed be "a tremendous amount of work". This
would make it unnessecary to purchase a Microsoft or Borland 
compiler to do serious development on Windows NT and 95. That would
be a major breakthrough.

I'm unclear about what kind of "synergy" is needed, though. The 
Win32 bindings should work with either, right?


-- 
T.E.D.          
                |  Work - mailto:dennison@escmail.orl.mmc.com  |
                |  Home - mailto:dennison@iag.net              |
                |  URL  - http://www.iag.net/~dennison         |