Re: Now Unix sucks, too!

Re: Now Unix sucks, too!

[Bob Kitzberger]

Bob Crispen (revbob@EIGHT-BALL.HV.BOEING.COM) wrote:
: Jay Martin <jmartin@CS.UCLA.EDU> sez:
[...]
: > I am having trouble thinking of a
: >standard Unix utility that is not a total misdesigned piece of crap!
: >Maybe someone can help me.

: No, I don't think so, Jay.  I suggest you cherish your prejudices and
: every now and then bring them out to polish them.  Pretty much what
: you're doing now.

: The *real* reason I wrote is to say that I use Makefiles pretty
: extensively with Ada.  I don't have a top-ten list of reasons, but I
: do have three:

Yes, I understand that make has its uses, but that doesn't mean
that Jay is wrong in claiming that it's a misdesigned POC ;-)


--
Bob Kitzberger	      Rational Software Corporation       rlk@rational.com

Re: Now Unix sucks, too!

[Bob Crispen]

rlk@nubuddy (Bob Kitzberger) wrote:

>Yes, I understand that make has its uses, but that doesn't mean
>that Jay is wrong in claiming that it's a misdesigned POC ;-)

Now just wait, I say wait, a dogbone minute there, boy.  (Remember the
last time I started a post out that way and the idiocy it contained?
Well you ain't seen nothin' yet!)

make is a TRADITION!  It's like not having the dashes in tar or the
syntax of sed and awk.  Dang!  Without SOME traditions there'd be no
need for a priesthood!

This younger generation!  No respect for traditional values!

Bob Crispen
crispen@hiwaay.net

Re: Now Unix sucks, too!

[dcw]

In article <4ii4pl$9ga@parlor.hiwaay.net>,
Bob Crispen <crispen@hiwaay.net> wrote:
>rlk@nubuddy (Bob Kitzberger) wrote:
>
>>Yes, I understand that make has its uses, but that doesn't mean
>>that Jay is wrong in claiming that it's a misdesigned POC ;-)
>
>Now just wait, I say wait, a dogbone minute there, boy.  (Remember the
>last time I started a post out that way and the idiocy it contained?
>Well you ain't seen nothin' yet!)
>
>make is a TRADITION!  It's like not having the dashes in tar or the
>syntax of sed and awk.  Dang!  Without SOME traditions there'd be no
>need for a priesthood!
>
>This younger generation!  No respect for traditional values!
>
>Bob Crispen
>crispen@hiwaay.net
>
>

Putting a somewhat more serious spin on what Bob said, it is well to remember
that make has been around for quite some time and was a piece of breakthrough
technology at its inception.


(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((()))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

David Willett               Lucent Technologies 
                            (formerly AT&T's systems & 
                             technology business)
                            Greensboro, NC	USA


The opinions expressed above are not necessarily those of 
Lucent Technologies or AT&T Corp.

William Safire's Rules for Writers

Number two: The passive voice should never be used.

Re: Now Unix sucks, too!

[Byron B. Kauffman]

Bob Crispen wrote:
> 
> Jay Martin <jmartin@CS.UCLA.EDU> sez:
> 

blah, blah, snip, snip

I've been doing the Ada thing for about 8 years or so, with 6 or 7 of
the 8 years spent working on DEC/VMS/Open VMS development systems for
VAX and 68040 targets, with the remainder (and currently) being in UNIX
environments - Harris HAPSE and SGI/VERDIX, to be exact. 

I realize making this statement may disqualify me from ever deserving
the official title of 'Mr. Embedded Software Engineer', but I guess I
just got spoiled by DEC, because I'm having a really hard time getting
used to the overall 'hackiness' of the UNIX way of life and the fact
that that same philosophy permeates the UNIX Ada products I've been
exposed to (admittedly, a short list). 

My current situation is that are currently porting an EXTREMLY large
piece of Ada (~4000 program units) to an SGI machine. Here's my
"rhetorical" question - why can't the UNIX Ada development systems (with
the obvious exception of the Rational Rose/APEX/etc. products) come up
with something as good as DEC's? Why should I, for example, have to
create make files that refer to other make files because there happen to
be too many source files in my system, or even better yet, have to
compile all 4000 source files into one library because the linker has
problems resolving generics between libraries? My source code is Ada,
but from the outside it REALLY looks like C, if you know what I mean.
(OMIGOSH!!! Maybe it's a C conspiracy against the evil Ada world!!!).
Not. I just think that some of these other houses should take a long
look at DEC's.

DEC Ada on DEC Unix

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <314D7065.40CF@lfwc.lockheed.com>, "Byron B. Kauffman" <KauffmanBB@lfwc.lockheed.com> writes:

> I've been doing the Ada thing for about 8 years or so, with 6 or 7 of
> the 8 years spent working on DEC/VMS/Open VMS development systems for
> VAX and 68040 targets, with the remainder (and currently) being in UNIX
> environments - Harris HAPSE and SGI/VERDIX, to be exact. 

> My current situation is that are currently porting an EXTREMLY large
> piece of Ada (~4000 program units) to an SGI machine. Here's my
> "rhetorical" question - why can't the UNIX Ada development systems (with
> the obvious exception of the Rational Rose/APEX/etc. products) come up
> with something as good as DEC's?

So how does DEC Ada do on DEC Unix ?

Supposedly it is comes from the same code base.

Re: DEC Ada on DEC Unix

[Keith Hyman]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> 
> In article <314D7065.40CF@lfwc.lockheed.com>, "Byron B. Kauffman" <KauffmanBB@lfwc.lockheed.com> writes:
> 
> > I've been doing the Ada thing for about 8 years or so, with 6 or 7 of
> > the 8 years spent working on DEC/VMS/Open VMS development systems for
> > VAX and 68040 targets, with the remainder (and currently) being in UNIX
> > environments - Harris HAPSE and SGI/VERDIX, to be exact.
> 
> > My current situation is that are currently porting an EXTREMLY large
> > piece of Ada (~4000 program units) to an SGI machine. Here's my
> > "rhetorical" question - why can't the UNIX Ada development systems (with
> > the obvious exception of the Rational Rose/APEX/etc. products) come up
> > with something as good as DEC's? 


> So how does DEC Ada do on DEC Unix ?
> 
> Supposedly it is comes from the same code base.
> So how does DEC Ada do on DEC Unix ?

> Supposedly it is comes from the same code base

With some bugs...  The version of Dec Ada for Ultrix that I used ate 
up 4k of RAM for every open and close of a disk file.  At one point we 
lost 1.25 MB a day.  This problem was known within DEC but not 
advertised or published to my knowledge.  Eventually, we were 
forwarded the instructions on how to fix the ported LOW_LEVEL_IO.ada 
module.