* Ada95 and .NET @ 2001-04-09 15:32 Kai Gläsner 2001-04-09 21:07 ` Juergen Pfeifer 2001-04-14 5:28 ` William J. Thomas 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Kai Gläsner @ 2001-04-09 15:32 UTC (permalink / raw) Hello community, after using GNATCOM for several prototypes and after using GNATCOM-objects succesfully under the Microsoft Beta 1 .NET framework, I would like to know if there are plans for a genuine GNAT.NET port. From my point of view the implications of this new platform seem to be very large. Thanks in advance for the answer Kai ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada95 and .NET 2001-04-09 15:32 Ada95 and .NET Kai Gläsner @ 2001-04-09 21:07 ` Juergen Pfeifer 2001-04-14 5:28 ` William J. Thomas 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Juergen Pfeifer @ 2001-04-09 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw) > after using GNATCOM for several prototypes and after using > GNATCOM-objects succesfully under the Microsoft Beta 1 .NET framework, > I would like to know if there are plans for a genuine GNAT.NET port. > From my point of view the implications of this new platform seem to be > very large. > They will be, for sure. But I don't believe that you'll see a quality GNAT.NET in the near future. ACT is driven by customer demand (customer here means people who pay for the service). This is the only working approach for a small company making its revenue from selling product support and services. I guess with .NET the same will happen as happened initially with Win2000. People are biased against Microsoft and anti-MS FUD will keep people away from .NET, like happened with Win2000. Then, after a while the facts can't be ignored. Nowadays you see a lot of people and companies realizing that Win2000 is technically very good, performant and stable. They install it and use it for production. The same will happen to .NET and that means, that ACT may have customer demand for GNAT.NET in maybe 12-18 month from now. My 2c. J�rgen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada95 and .NET 2001-04-09 15:32 Ada95 and .NET Kai Gläsner 2001-04-09 21:07 ` Juergen Pfeifer @ 2001-04-14 5:28 ` William J. Thomas 2001-04-16 14:32 ` Marin David Condic 2001-04-16 15:26 ` David Botton 1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: William J. Thomas @ 2001-04-14 5:28 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 969 bytes --] "Kai Gl�sner" wrote > I would like to know if there are plans for a genuine GNAT.NET port. > From my point of view the implications of this new platform seem to be > very large. > If doing so would by any means give Ada an early in-road to a new market, or put Ada in a position of being 'out in front' or 'just in time' for a change, then you can almost bet that it will be a good two years ( or however long it takes to possibly have no positive impact at all) before you will see an implementation for the .NET platform. And when you do see Ada on the .NET platform you can be sure it will be some kludged superficial hack that requires contortions, cranks, and incantations to fire up just a Console application. An implementation that fully embraces the .NET concepts along with a full blown 'state of the art' kick ass GUI builder, well..... Just be thankful that you have Ada for embedded systems and leave the .NET GUI world to C#. William J. Thomas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada95 and .NET 2001-04-14 5:28 ` William J. Thomas @ 2001-04-16 14:32 ` Marin David Condic 2001-04-16 16:24 ` William Dale 2001-04-16 15:26 ` David Botton 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2001-04-16 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw) Well, that's a little like tossing a stink-bomb into the room. :-) Its unfortunate that there is a perception out there that Ada is inevitably going to miss the boat on a newly emerging environment, simply because it is Ada and hence, can't win. (Sort of the Al Bundy of programming languages? :-) I'd like to think that Ada is nicely positioned to be directed at a new, emerging environment and that all it takes is for someone to jump at the opportunity & get to market first and all will be rosy in the Ada world. Unfortunately, I can understand where you come from on this. All too often, Ada has just managed to show up a day late and a dollar short so that it ends up in the "Also Ran" category. The problem is that even if there is a wonderful new environment in which Ada could take the lead, it all too often requires major resources to take a stab at capturing it. The technical development is costly enough, but then there's the sales and marketing effort that has to be done and that can be far more costly. Who has that kind of money to invest? Probably the most likely growth path for Ada is to get into some small, emerging environment that is being built by a handfull of geeks or a small company or community of users. If that environment succeeds, then Ada flies with it. Trying to bust into a market of millions of users against industry giant competitors is a bit unlikely. I think Sun Tsu had something to say on the subject..... MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "William J. Thomas" <wjthomas@wcvt.com> wrote in message news:tdfn7gao7n1q28@corp.supernews.com... > If doing so would by any means give Ada an early in-road to a new market, or > put Ada in a position of being 'out in front' or 'just in time' for a > change, then you can almost bet that it will be a good two years ( or > however long it takes to possibly have no positive impact at all) before you > will see an implementation for the .NET platform. And when you do see Ada > on the .NET platform you can be sure it will be some kludged superficial > hack that requires contortions, cranks, and incantations to fire up just a > Console application. An implementation that fully embraces the .NET concepts > along with a full blown 'state of the art' kick ass GUI builder, well..... > Just be thankful that you have Ada for embedded systems and leave the .NET > GUI world to C#. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada95 and .NET 2001-04-16 14:32 ` Marin David Condic @ 2001-04-16 16:24 ` William Dale 2001-04-16 20:30 ` Marin David Condic 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: William Dale @ 2001-04-16 16:24 UTC (permalink / raw) Marin David Condic wrote: > > Well, that's a little like tossing a stink-bomb into the room. :-) > > Its unfortunate that there is a perception out there that Ada is inevitably > going to miss the boat on a newly emerging environment, simply because it is > Ada and hence, can't win. (Sort of the Al Bundy of programming languages? > :-) I think its more of the Homer Simpson of programming languages - it does work at Nuclear Power plants? ;-) Bill Dale ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada95 and .NET 2001-04-16 16:24 ` William Dale @ 2001-04-16 20:30 ` Marin David Condic 2001-04-16 22:16 ` Ed Falis 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Marin David Condic @ 2001-04-16 20:30 UTC (permalink / raw) As I understand it, to "Homer" something up, one must succeed in spite of enormous ineptitude and incompetence. A gratuitous example: To fall asleep at the control pannel of the nuclear power plant and accidentally bump the "off" switch in the midst of a reactor scram, thus becoming a hero while being derilect in one's duty. I'd like to think Ada is more anti-Homer: It manages to fail in spite of enormous capability while lesser languages go on to success. In contrast, Al Bundy could win the lottery and be riding high, only to know that at any minute the IRS is going to come along and slam him in jail while Peggy spends the whole wad on cosmetics. - But Ada isn't quite like that because it has not experienced some kind of enormous success only to have it snatched away. Maybe its more the Drew Carey of programming languages. Great at its job, but never recognized and always tormented by its ugly co-worker, Mimi. (C is the "Mimi" of programming languages?) Well, this has drifted a bit far afield, eh? :-) MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "William Dale" <william.dale.jr+adanews@lmco.com> wrote in message news:3ADB1CCA.9FE756B9@lmco.com... > I think its more of the Homer Simpson of programming languages - it does > work at Nuclear Power plants? ;-) > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada95 and .NET 2001-04-16 20:30 ` Marin David Condic @ 2001-04-16 22:16 ` Ed Falis 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Ed Falis @ 2001-04-16 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw) Marin David Condic wrote: > Maybe its more the Drew Carey of programming languages. Great at its > job, > but never recognized and always tormented by its ugly co-worker, Mimi. > (C is > the "Mimi" of programming languages?) > > Well, this has drifted a bit far afield, eh? :-) Actually, Rodney Dangerfield comes to mind. - Ed ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada95 and .NET 2001-04-14 5:28 ` William J. Thomas 2001-04-16 14:32 ` Marin David Condic @ 2001-04-16 15:26 ` David Botton 2001-04-16 20:23 ` Ayende Rahien 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: David Botton @ 2001-04-16 15:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada As was pointed out, using GNATCOM you already have access to .NET's GUI and common runtime library. Granted that doing so may be considered by you a bit of a "Kludge" since it is being accessed through COM instead of by interpreted C# code. I would though say Ada is not exactly in the backseet for .NET support. A true .NET port is certainly a thought in many peoples mind and a fairly realistic project since .NET is not much more then MS's old JVM with a twist or two. A little work and JGNAT could be singing .NET. I think that when the time is ripe there will be commercial and/or volunteer Ada.NETs running around. David Botton ----- Original Message ----- From: "William J. Thomas" <wjthomas@wcvt.com> > If doing so would by any means give Ada an early in-road to a new market, or > put Ada in a position of being 'out in front' or 'just in time' for a > change, then you can almost bet that it will be a good two years ( or > however long it takes to possibly have no positive impact at all) before you > will see an implementation for the .NET platform. And when you do see Ada > on the .NET platform you can be sure it will be some kludged superficial > hack that requires contortions, cranks, and incantations to fire up just a > Console application. An implementation that fully embraces the .NET concepts > along with a full blown 'state of the art' kick ass GUI builder, well..... > Just be thankful that you have Ada for embedded systems and leave the .NET > GUI world to C#. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada95 and .NET 2001-04-16 15:26 ` David Botton @ 2001-04-16 20:23 ` Ayende Rahien 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Ayende Rahien @ 2001-04-16 20:23 UTC (permalink / raw) "David Botton" <David@Botton.com> wrote in message news:mailman.987435136.1872.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org... > As was pointed out, using GNATCOM you already have access to .NET's GUI and > common runtime library. Granted that doing so may be considered by you a bit > of a "Kludge" since it is being accessed through COM instead of by > interpreted C# code. I would though say Ada is not exactly in the backseet > for .NET support. A> C# is not an (only) interpreted language. B> I think he meant a compiler that will: 1) allow you to use/inherit/be father of all of .NET compatible classes. 2) compile to IL. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-04-16 22:16 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2001-04-09 15:32 Ada95 and .NET Kai Gläsner 2001-04-09 21:07 ` Juergen Pfeifer 2001-04-14 5:28 ` William J. Thomas 2001-04-16 14:32 ` Marin David Condic 2001-04-16 16:24 ` William Dale 2001-04-16 20:30 ` Marin David Condic 2001-04-16 22:16 ` Ed Falis 2001-04-16 15:26 ` David Botton 2001-04-16 20:23 ` Ayende Rahien
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox