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=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a32653cf595422e6
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.125.233 with SMTP id mt9mr1495893pbb.5.1335274065642;
        Tue, 24 Apr 2012 06:27:45 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 r9ni93168pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!volia.net!news2.volia.net!feed-A.news.volia.net!takemy.news.telefonica.de!telefonica.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 15:27:43 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT and register allocation
References: <4f9138c2$0$6628$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 	<4f9145b5$0$6557$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 	<jmrpej$cao$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 	<4f918218$0$6557$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
 	<82r4vhi8v4.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 	<4f94352f$0$6625$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 	<87aa23d5tz.fsf@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk>
 	<4f9474d4$0$7611$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <82lillgvx9.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
In-Reply-To: <82lillgvx9.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
Message-ID: <4f96aa50$0$7617$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Apr 2012 15:27:44 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 331d28cd.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=3dcjGd8nif;LNKYb?b>076ic==]BZ:af>4Fo<]lROoR1<`=YMgDjhg2Z4`Yna[0]:>nc\616M64>:Lh>_cHTX3j=@VX5`\n8\C8
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-04-24T15:27:44+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 24.04.12 14:24, Stephen Leake wrote:

> I think (well-written) gpr files are _much_ more understandable than
> comparable makefiles for C!

Yes, GNAT project files are understandable, though non-portable TTBOMK.
(I find its idiolect a little inconsistent WRT to plurals and lists.)

Gpr files will likely not be used by those who code for Intel's
Fortran compiler, or the C part of GCC; they can easily specify
IFCOPTS or GCCOPTS referenced in Makefiles.

The Makefile for all C programs, or C++ programs, and a number of other
languages currently looks simlar to this:

%.c : %.systematic-name
	mv $< $@

%.executable : %.c
	$(CC) -pipe -Wall $(COPTS) $(GCCOPTS) $< -o $@

So the source text can be all in one file, the translation is kept simple.
GNAT also gets only two lines, one for gnatchop, the other for gnatmake.