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,f495c7652c09dd8c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: David Botton <David@Botton.com>
Subject: Re: Does this model work ?
Date: 1999/05/20
Message-ID: <374443A8.DE85A1DB@Botton.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 480193339
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <373e38e2.31311363@news2.ibm.net> <7hmcu1$k8g$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <37412e95.34501560@news2.ibm.net> <7ho4f8$nn4$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <3741754f.964957@news2.ibm.net> <37419180.3A5AB46F@hso.link.com>
 <37426e11.4648444@news2.ibm.net> <7i17ug$1u1k@news2.newsguy.com>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: abuse@gate.net
X-Trace: news.gate.net 927220648 71998 199.227.35.85 (20 May 1999 17:17:28
 GMT)
Organization: CyberGate, Inc.
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 May 1999 17:17:28 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-05-20T17:17:28+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Yes, but what if the results of gcc front ends were sent around? Then a
modified gcc code generator could be used that would also handle
security issues when needed (would not be any more dangerous the
Microsoft ActiveX controls).

David Botton


Samuel Mize wrote:
> 
> Jean-Marten Marchi <jmarten@ibm.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 May 1999 11:12:48 -0500, "Samuel T. Harris"
> > <sam_harris@hso.link.com> wrote:
> >
> >>An Ada to JVM compiler gives me a single product which can
> >>be universally distributed (well, almost universally :) and
> >>can even be run from a remote web site. The need for more
> >>efficient implementations for specific customers does not
> >>negate the need for universal distribution.
> >
> > Why can't you have the best of both solutions, as long as you
> > distribute source code ?
> 
> I have enough hassles keeping the compilers *I* want around, let
> alone having to maintain a bunch of compilers on my machine for
> languages I don't like and don't want, just in case a web page I
> want to see has an applet written in COBOL.
> 
> Java byte-code is at an excellent abstraction level for distribution
> of things that most people want to run without modifying.  The
> developer can use whatever tool he wants, and then I can run it
> without having that tool.  8000 compilers can all be targeted to the
> same byte code format, and a consumer can run the results without
> having any of them.
> 
> From the point of view of a consumer who wants to be able to modify
> a program, source code is the way to go.
> 
> Best,
> Sam Mize
> 
> --
> Samuel Mize -- smize@imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada
> Fight Spam: see http://www.cauce.org/ \\\ Smert Spamonam