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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d59853e2dd116420 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-08-13 01:23:16 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: JGNAT status??? (Volunteers?) Date: 13 Aug 2002 01:23:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0208130023.18207a97@posting.google.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1029226996 28480 127.0.0.1 (13 Aug 2002 08:23:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Aug 2002 08:23:16 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:27970 Date: 2002-08-13T08:23:16+00:00 List-Id: "Robert C. Leif" wrote in message news:... > From: Bob Leif > To: Ant?io Vargas et al. > You might try another approach. Ask how many of us would > pay some > reasonable amount, $50 to $100 for a copy of JGNAT. To > add to my heresy, I don't see any heresy there. If you think that's a viable economic model, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and give it a go? :-) > I would suggest a version of JGNAT that worked with > Microsoft's intermediate language. That's technically confused. What distinguishes JGNAT from the regular version of GNAT is code that depends entirely on the structure and details of the JVM. A version of GNAT that generated .NET compatible pseudo-code would be a completely new project (requiring effort of the order of person years from people who knew what they were doing). Yes, perhaps you could derive some useful input, and even possibly *some* copied code from JGNAT, but in no sense would this be a "version of JGNAT". A version of GNAT generating code for .NET is certainly a perfectly reasonable idea. So far however we have seen zero interest/demand in such a product. Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies