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: 103376,5fbee81c9eb2f3d5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-08-19 17:09:50 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: Ada -> .NET effort in progress Date: 19 Aug 2002 17:09:49 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0208191609.1453a3fb@posting.google.com> References: <3D60D8F6.C2F1F35@earthlink.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1029802190 25926 127.0.0.1 (20 Aug 2002 00:09:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Aug 2002 00:09:50 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:28226 Date: 2002-08-20T00:09:50+00:00 List-Id: "Marc A. Criley" wrote in message news:<3D60D8F6.C2F1F35@earthlink.net>... > Since I'm hesitant to just go and post another's email, despite it being > sent out on a public list, I'll just provide a pointer to the archived > message instead: One think that Martin says in that mail is <<3) I think the failure of JGNAT was not technical, but demand-based. If ACT had a customer base that wanted the technology, you can bet they'd proceed. Follow the $$. Lately I've spent a fair amount of time in the JGNAT sources, and they are quite technically sound.>> I don't regard JGNAT in any sense as a failure. This was a DoD funded project that most definitely achieved its purpose, which was to demonstrate that it was feasible to adapt GNAT to generate JBC, and to provide a GPL'ed version of this technology to the community. Both these objectives were certainly achieved. Now if you are disappointed that ACT no longer continues further (unfunded) development of this project, well that indeed reflects a complete lack of commercial interest. Certainly ACT devotes its own internal resources to projects in which the commercial market is interested, and that will continue to be the case.