Re: Separate Compilation in Programming Languages

["Alex R. Mosteo" <amosteo@unizar.es>]

Ray Blaak wrote:
> <adaworks@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>> "Robert A Duff" <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in message 
>> news:wccfxverpyo.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com...
>>> I agree.  I'm completely mystified by Richard's assertion that the
>>> existence of gnatmake might indicate a problem with GNAT.  Any decent
>>> Ada implementation comes with a tool that knows how to rebuild (what to
>>> recompile/relink/whatever, and in what order, if that matters) based on
>>> what source files changed.  The fact that such a tool can exist is one
>>> thing that makes Ada better than (for example) C.
>>>
>> It was not my intention to suggest any problem with GNAT.   I probably
>> did not phrase my response to the question very well.
> 
> In the interests of keeping any controversy alive, if you accept the use of
> tools that help an Ada compiler know what to rebuild based on what source
> files have changed, how is the use of tools that help a Java compiler to do
> the same thing a sign of deficient dependency control? I.e. Ant.

I guess the difference here is that Ada mandates a consistent build
environment, be it via some library or what gnat does, while with Java
you must go out to look for extra tools explicitly, and the features of
these extra tools are not clearly defined by the Java spec. But I'm
jumping in late and could be wrong.