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: f891f,7be483be03d93e95 X-Google-Attributes: gidf891f,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,7be483be03d93e95 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU (Richard A. O'Keefe) Subject: Re: Renaming GNAT? (was Re: Ada to C convertor) Date: 1996/02/26 Message-ID: <4grecb$pbi@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 141170399 references: <822747617.19372@assen.demon.co.uk> <4eg3op$atb@dfw.dfw.net> <4f8smt$cpo@stc06.ctd.ornl.gov> <4fd49r$sr@nms.telepost.no> <4gfjie$g76@nms.telepost.no> organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.misc Date: 1996-02-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: tor@spacetec.no (Tor Arntsen) writes: >I don't agree with this. Most of us thinks of, and speaks of, GNU C as >a very good ANSI C compiler. I strongly disagree with this. There is a _language_ called GNU C, which has numerous extensions over standard C. There is a _program_ called GCC, which compiles that language (and several others). This is the first time since gcc was released that I've heard of anyone calling gcc gnu c. (If you check the gcc man page carefully, you will find that the phrase "GNU C compiler" most naturally admits the reading "compiler for the GNU C language", given that the rest of the paragraph calls the program "GNU CC". Perhaps I should stop calling it gcc and call it GNU CC.) >We do know that it has some extensions here >and there, but that doesn't make us think that 'GNU C' is the compiler >for the 'GNU C language'. But there _is_ a "GNU C" language (it has nested functions, for example, which C lacks), and gcc (or GNU CC) compiles it (amongst other languages). I think most people would (and arguably _should_) regard the "name" of a program as being the word they use to invoke it. So I use C compilers called "cc", "gcc", and "lcc", and as far as I'm concerned, these nouns are their names. If I call someone "Fred!" and he responds, then in that context Fred is his name. I do NOT invoke GNAT by typing "GNU Ada", so "GNU Ada" does not _function_ as its name. Most of the time, the name I use for GNAT is "gnatmake". >I don't agree with this either, actually. It may look like that for you, but >you have lived within GNAT for a long time. The rest of the world have no >idea of what GNAT is, and how could they ever guess it's an Ada compiler? >Call it GNU Ada and they will know.. If it's called "GNU Ada", people will think it is a distinct dialect, just as GNU C is not identical to C, GNU Pascal was not identical to ISO Pascal Extended when last I looked at it, GNU C++ didn't accept the same language as other C++ compilers (well, no two C++ compilers do, do they). There are many people to consider: 1. the people who wrote GNAT 2. the people who maintain GNAT 3. the people currently using GNAT 4. the people who would use GNAT if they GNEW about it. I find it very difficult to believe that the people in group 4 are being or will be seriously confused by the name. After all, where in the name "UNIX" or "Linux" does it say it's an operating system? -- Election time; but how to get Labor _out_ without letting Liberal _in_? Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/~ok; RMIT Comp.Sci.