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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,75ceae0e15e2ed62 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-09-07 06:55:55 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!ps01-sjc1!news.webusenet.com!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!harp.news.atl.earthlink.net!not-for-mail From: Marin David Condic Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: The Ada experience. Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2002 09:55:28 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Message-ID: <3D7A054F.25E84ECF@acm.org> References: <9a25nugj860iofuv46h2l2bbvlgf4ophc0@4ax.com> <4519e058.0209062259.1ab868de@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: d1.56.b3.c9 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Date: 7 Sep 2002 13:55:54 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (WinNT; I) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:28776 Date: 2002-09-07T13:55:54+00:00 List-Id: Your complaints about VisualC++ are fair, but there are two perspectives to look at. MSVC++ is very feature-rich and well integrated. Gnat as a compiler is a command-line oriented thing with some add-on tools that might make it a bit more of an IDE. (Waiting to see what GPS provides.) In this sense, I can understand the complaint about it looking like something from the '60s in comparison to MSVC++. The other perspective is that even though MSVC++ is a feature-rich, well integrated set of tools, the execution thereof can be quite poor. Throw on top of it the naturally difficult syntax/semantics of C++ and all the traps that implies plus the awkward and butt-ugly cripcrap that MSVC++ sticks into the code so it can connect up to the GUI building thing and you've got a royal mess. It can make you yearn for the '60s where all you wanted to do was develop for a command line. :-) MDC -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jast.mil/ Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "I'd trade it all for just a little more" -- Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10] ====================================================================== Ted Dennison wrote: > > > I'm guessing you are comparing it to VisualC++, no? > > I suppose it depends on your perspective. For me, developing using > VisualC++ (version 6.0) feels like playing with a toy compared to the > Gnat toolkit. The editor is nice looking, but not nearly functional > enough. The compiler doesn't implement the language properly (or even > very well). Template support is a particular disaster. It has > gawd-aful error messages, which causes the user way more work that > should be nessecary to figure out what they did wrong (its not > uncommon for something simple like a missing semicolon to pull an > error somewhere deep in a standard library header file). It comes with > a semi-functional non-standard version of the STL. To top it off, its > chock full of code-generation bugs, which act as little day-wasting > land mines for you to periodicly step on. And good luck trying to get > Bill G. to fix them for you, or getting the sources to fix them > yourself. > > The code builder is too moronic figure out recompilation dependancies > without manual user intervention (which is just begging for errors). > Maintaining all those dependancies manually in a large project is > simply impossible. > > But I'll grant you, its a nice *shiny* toy. :-)