Re: gnat for DOS

[griest-tom@cs.yale.edu (Tom Griest)]

sjames@wam.umd.edu (Scott H. James) writes:
>
>begin Dewar
>
>  P.S. Even with the new version, you are well advised to move to a real
>  32 bit operating system (OS/2, NT. Solaris 86, Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD,
>  Nextstep) to do any serious Ada development on a PC. Of these at least
>  OS/2, Linux and NT support tasking fully.
>
>end Dewar
>
>
>Sigh.
>
>While your comment is perhaps relevant to GUI and OS-application
>programming, with regards to embedded programming your repeated smirks at DOS
>smack of either gross ignorance or wishful thinking.  Due to DOS's relatively
>low system overhead, straightforward access to hardware, and the
>proliferation of ROM DOS chips, rest assured DOS is and will remain with us
>as a low-end embedded OS option for many years to come.  To continually bash
>DOS does nothing for Ada and perhaps, in the future, should be relegated to
>comp.os.advocacy or alt.windows.and.mice.are.really.cool or some
>other such group.

I don't think Robert was "bashing DOS".  His comment was advice based
on the fact that you have to be running 32-bits to run GNAT and that it
makes sense to use a "native" 32-bit OS instead of a 16-bit OS with
a 32-bit extender on it.  NOTE: the word "development" in his quote.
As for target systems....  knock yourself out.  We are developing
on WinNT and targeting a 2"x3" 386EX board (and have targeted PC's
running DOS too).  Of course if you only have one box, and don't
want to reboot often, then DOS host/target is probably the way to go.
You just have to judge for yourself if your time lost by using DOS
as a development system is worth less than then the cost of a
second "embedded DOS box" (probably under $500).

-Tom