* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
@ 1998-02-23 0:00 Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96
1998-02-24 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
1998-02-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96 @ 1998-02-23 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
David Weller <dweller@UNIVERSE.DIGEX.NET> writes:
>NO NO NO NO!!!
>
>Repeat after me: GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce
>C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code.
>GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT
>does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT
>produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce
>C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code.
>
>There. Feel better now? :-)
>
Where did this particular piece of Urban Lore get started? I seem
to recall many years ago that somebody had an Ada83 compiler that
generated C as "high level assembler" - Irvine seems to suggest
itself, but I wouldn't swear to it.
It seems lots of folks "know" this piece of lore and it must have
had some basis in fact or legend which has served to keep it
going.
MDC
Marin David Condic, Senior Computer Engineer Voice: 561.796.8997
Pratt & Whitney GESP, M/S 731-95, P.O.B. 109600 Fax: 561.796.4669
West Palm Beach, FL, 33410-9600 Internet: CONDICMA@PWFL.COM
=============================================================================
"Because that's where they keep the money."
-- Willie Sutton when asked why he robbed banks.
=============================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-23 0:00 Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++ Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96
@ 1998-02-24 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
1998-02-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Dale Stanbrough @ 1998-02-24 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Marin David Condic writes:
" Where did this particular piece of Urban Lore get started? I seem
to recall many years ago that somebody had an Ada83 compiler that
generated C as "high level assembler" - Irvine seems to suggest
itself, but I wouldn't swear to it.
It seems lots of folks "know" this piece of lore and it must have
had some basis in fact or legend which has served to keep it
going."
I've seen many students make this mistake, and it seems to stem from...
gcc is a compiler that compiles C programs.
i use gcc to compile Ada programs
ergo the compile translates Ada to C, and then compiles it.
Another reason for this confusion was the original name of Gnat - the
GNu Ada Translator (an acronym which Robert Dewar has since disowned)
- people are used to using the word Translator and compiler to mean
very different things.
Dale
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-23 0:00 Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++ Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96
1998-02-24 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
@ 1998-02-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1998-02-25 0:00 ` Jean-Pierre Rosen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 1998-02-24 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Marin said
<< Where did this particular piece of Urban Lore get started? I seem
to recall many years ago that somebody had an Ada83 compiler that
generated C as "high level assembler" - Irvine seems to suggest
itself, but I wouldn't swear to it.
It seems lots of folks "know" this piece of lore and it must have
had some basis in fact or legend which has served to keep it
going.
MDC
>>
The lore in question is the completely wrong assumptionj that GNAT generates
C. In fact I think this comes from three things:
1. The fact that GCC stands for GNU C compiler, and people know GNAT somehow
uses GCC. These days, GCC is much more than a C compiler, but the
confusion persists.
2. The fact that the T in GNAT used to stand for translator, that was our
mistake. We have retained the name, but now take the position that
GNAT is not an acronym and stands for nothing.
3. The fact that GNAT has in the past always generated its main program
from the binder in C, and you see this C code if you do a list
from GDB before doing anything else. The current version of GNAT
can also generate the main program in Ada, and we will make this
the default at some point.
Still, the legend is indeed completely wrong. In no sense does GNAT
translate your Ada code into C code.
Robert Dewar
Ada COre Technologies
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Ada to C++ Translators
@ 1998-02-13 0:00 David Kusuda
1998-02-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: David Kusuda @ 1998-02-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
I'm pretty sure that this has been discussed before, but can anyone
direct me towards an Ada to C++ translator? Any information would be
greatly appreciated.
Dave
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada to C++ Translators
1998-02-13 0:00 Ada to C++ Translators David Kusuda
@ 1998-02-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1998-02-16 0:00 ` David Weller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Larry Kilgallen @ 1998-02-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <34E47622.15EB@atc-1s.hac.com>, David Kusuda <dkusu@atc-1s.hac.com> writes:
> I'm pretty sure that this has been discussed before, but can anyone
> direct me towards an Ada to C++ translator? Any information would be
> greatly appreciated.
The World Wide Web site DejaNews.com can direct you to many things
which have been discussed before in this newsgroup. For the topic
you raise there are _many_ previous discussions going on at length
typically petering out with people arguing about what constitutes
usable translation.
Larry Kilgallen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada to C++ Translators
1998-02-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
@ 1998-02-16 0:00 ` David Weller
1998-02-18 0:00 ` Jean D. Ichbiah
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: David Weller @ 1998-02-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <1998Feb13.213046.1@eisner>,
Larry Kilgallen <Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam> wrote:
>In article <34E47622.15EB@atc-1s.hac.com>, David Kusuda <dkusu@atc-1s.hac.com> writes:
>> I'm pretty sure that this has been discussed before, but can anyone
>> direct me towards an Ada to C++ translator? Any information would be
>> greatly appreciated.
>
>The World Wide Web site DejaNews.com can direct you to many things
>which have been discussed before in this newsgroup. For the topic
>you raise there are _many_ previous discussions going on at length
>typically petering out with people arguing about what constitutes
>usable translation.
>
Or something about an infinite number of monkeys working for a finite
amount of time and pounding out some pretty good C code :-)
Let's save Mr. Kusuda a bag of time:
1) It can be done
2) Over a lot of time
3) With a lot of money
4) Starting from scratch is MUCH cheaper
5) It's a pretty dumb thing to do anyway
(It takes less code to do a project in Ada95 than in C++)
--
****** NEW!! DoD Ada Hotline Number: 1-800-PARIAH ******
Tired of "junk" e-mail? Write to your congressman and tell them you support
H.R. 1748, "The Netizens Protection Act of 1997". Make those SPAM-roaches run! http://www.cauce.org TAKE BACK THE INTERNET!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Ada to C++ Translators
1998-02-16 0:00 ` David Weller
@ 1998-02-18 0:00 ` Jean D. Ichbiah
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++ Nick Roberts
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jean D. Ichbiah @ 1998-02-18 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
On 16 Feb 1998 12:38:52 -0500, dweller@universe.digex.net (David
Weller) wrote:
> In article <1998Feb13.213046.1@eisner>,
> Larry Kilgallen <Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam> wrote:
> >In article <34E47622.15EB@atc-1s.hac.com>, David Kusuda <dkusu@atc-1s.hac.com> writes:
> >> I'm pretty sure that this has been discussed before, but can anyone
> >> direct me towards an Ada to C++ translator? Any information would be
> >> greatly appreciated.
[...]
> Let's save Mr. Kusuda a bag of time:
>
> 1) It can be done
> 2) Over a lot of time
> 3) With a lot of money
> 4) Starting from scratch is MUCH cheaper
> 5) It's a pretty dumb thing to do anyway
> (It takes less code to do a project in Ada95 than in C++)
Why so intolerant? Perhaps if you are asking about an automatic
translator. But hand translation is possible. A well-designed Ada
program will translate into a well-designed C++ program. (And a messy
Ada program - I have seen some horrifying examples too - will convert
into another mess.) In this context of hand translation:
1) is certainly true.
2) is incorrect. For a well designed program, it can be done in
linear time.
3) is wrong.
4) is wrong also: why repeat the careful analysis done in the first
place
5) is an academic assertion.
Let me give an example: I am doing most of my development using
Delphi. (More precisely, I program in Ada and use the Delphi compiler
to compile them. :)
Recently, however, I have been porting one of our applications to
Windows CE for the Palm PC. While I wish a Delphi or Ada compiler
had been available for this environment, there is none and I had to
convert the program to C++. While there are certain irritating
things with the arcane C syntax, I was able to produce something
that was line per line (almost) parallel to the original.
The namespace concept helped a lot. My impression of C++ is that
it is a huge language and that you can easily get lost. But if you
start from a clean model, it is easier to restrict yourself to a
manageable subset.
Jean Ichbiah
Textware Solutions
ichbiah@twsolutions.com
http://www.twsolutions.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-18 0:00 ` Jean D. Ichbiah
@ 1998-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1998-02-19 0:00 ` David Weller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Nick Roberts @ 1998-02-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Jean:
procedure Just_Like_Ada_Really (A, B: {in} Integer; var Result: {out}
String) ;{is}
begin
...
end {Just_Like_Ada_Really};
I have been where you now tread!
On the subject of translation from one high level language to another
(significantly different one). I think the consensus of opinion is that,
if you need the result to be readable (by humans), manual translation is
likely to be the only workable option.
Machine translation is certainly possible. Since GNAT produces C code (and
C++ is pretty well a superset of C), this suggests a possibility (doubtless
not entirely wrinkle-free). Also, automated translation, or partial
translation, could well be a good way to get a 'jump start' for a manual
translation (and it may even be practical for you to program this yourself,
since you need only be rough).
== Nick Roberts ================================================
== Croydon, UK ===========================
== ================
== Proprietor, ThoughtWing Software ==========
== Independent Software Development Consultant ======
== Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com ====
== Voicemail & Fax +44 181-405 1124 ===
== ==
== I live not in myself, but I become ==
=== Portion of that around me; and to me ==
==== High mountains are a feeling, but the hum ==
======= Of human cities torture.
=========== -- Byron [Childe Harold]
Jean D. Ichbiah <ichbiah@twsolutions.com> wrote in article
<34eb5d36.20077308@news.tiac.net>...
> [...] I am doing most of my development using
> Delphi. (More precisely, I program in Ada and use the Delphi compiler
> to compile them. :)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++ Nick Roberts
@ 1998-02-19 0:00 ` David Weller
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright
0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: David Weller @ 1998-02-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <01bd3cc5$a74ff160$LocalHost@xhv46.dial.pipex.com>,
Nick Roberts <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>Machine translation is certainly possible. Since GNAT produces C code (and
>C++ is pretty well a superset of C), this suggests a possibility (doubtless
NO NO NO NO!!!
Repeat after me: GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce
C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code.
GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT
does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT
produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce
C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code.
There. Feel better now? :-)
--
What is DIVX? Find out at http://www.riva.com/dvd_divx.html
Tired of "junk" e-mail? Write to your congressman and tell them you support
H.R. 1748, "The Netizens Protection Act of 1997". Make those SPAM-roaches run! http://www.cauce.org TAKE BACK THE INTERNET!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-19 0:00 ` David Weller
@ 1998-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Nick Roberts @ 1998-02-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Sorry! I got the impression that was how GNAT worked (translate Ada to C,
and then compile to executable). Looking at the documentation for GNAT
3.10 (R1.30), I see no mention of intermediate C. Is this how GNAT worked
once upon a time, or did I simply get totally the wrong end of the stick?
What is GNAT's relationship to GCC?
== Nick Roberts ================================================
== Croydon, UK ===========================
== ================
== Proprietor, ThoughtWing Software ==========
== Independent Software Development Consultant ======
== Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com ====
== Voicemail & Fax +44 181-405 1124 ===
== ==
== I live not in myself, but I become ==
=== Portion of that around me; and to me ==
==== High mountains are a feeling, but the hum ==
======= Of human cities torture.
=========== -- Byron [Childe Harold]
David Weller <dweller@universe.digex.net> wrote in article
<6chg3h$4qf@universe.digex.net>...
> In article <01bd3cc5$a74ff160$LocalHost@xhv46.dial.pipex.com>,
> Nick Roberts <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> >Machine translation is certainly possible. Since GNAT produces C code
(and
> >C++ is pretty well a superset of C), this suggests a possibility
(doubtless
>
>
> NO NO NO NO!!!
>
> Repeat after me: GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce
> C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code.
> GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT
> does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT
> produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce
> C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code. GNAT does NOT produce C code.
>
> There. Feel better now? :-)
>
> --
> What is DIVX? Find out at http://www.riva.com/dvd_divx.html
> Tired of "junk" e-mail? Write to your congressman and tell them you
support
> H.R. 1748, "The Netizens Protection Act of 1997". Make those
SPAM-roaches run! http://www.cauce.org TAKE BACK THE
INTERNET!
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
@ 1998-02-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1998-02-20 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Jon S Anthony @ 1998-02-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
"Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> writes:
> Sorry! I got the impression that was how GNAT worked (translate Ada to C,
> and then compile to executable). Looking at the documentation for GNAT
> 3.10 (R1.30), I see no mention of intermediate C. Is this how GNAT worked
> once upon a time, or did I simply get totally the wrong end of the stick?
You got it totally wrong.
> What is GNAT's relationship to GCC?
GNAT uses the gcc backend (just like g77, g++, and the good ol' c
compiler among others...) by producing an intermediate tree that it
eats. The output is machine code for the given platform.
/Jon
--
Jon Anthony
Synquiry Technologies, Ltd., Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately,
Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
@ 1998-02-20 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Richard Kenner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Nick Roberts @ 1998-02-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Many thanks. I think I read somewhere that "GNAT uses the FSF's[?]
renowned gcc technology", or something like that, and I had simply assumed
the rest. Funny how the old brain fills in the cracks (wrongly in this
case :-) innit?
Now to throw the cat among the pigeons: how difficult would it be to
retro-compile the tree into C (or even C++)?
While we're on the subject: is or was gcc a product of the FSF? Was it
(originally) written by Richard Stallman? I'm beginning to distrust my
memory now!
== Nick Roberts ================================================
== Croydon, UK ===========================
Jon S Anthony <jsa@synquiry.com> wrote in article
<ufvhubywi3.fsf@synquiry.com>...
[...]
> GNAT uses the gcc backend (just like g77, g++, and the good ol' c
> compiler among others...) by producing an intermediate tree that it
> eats. The output is machine code for the given platform.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-20 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
@ 1998-02-21 0:00 ` Richard Kenner
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 1998-02-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <01bd3e24$280e1c00$a8fc82c1@xhv46.dial.pipex.com> "Nick Roberts" <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> writes:
>Now to throw the cat among the pigeons: how difficult would it be to
>retro-compile the tree into C (or even C++)?
Extremely difficult. First of all, the interface isn't totally a
tree, but is mostly procedural, using trees just for expressions and
objects. So you'd have to catch all of the procedure calls as well.
But many of the trees (for example those involving variant records)
have no C equivalent anyway.
>While we're on the subject: is or was gcc a product of the FSF?
Yes.
>Was it (originally) written by Richard Stallman?
Yes, and he maintained it until sometime in the early 90's at which point
I took over maintenance of GCC.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Richard Kenner
@ 1998-02-21 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 1998-02-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <01bd3e24$280e1c00$a8fc82c1@xhv46.dial.pipex.com> "Nick Roberts" <Ni
k.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> writes:
>Now to throw the cat among the pigeons: how difficult would it be to
>retro-compile the tree into C (or even C++)?
(tree here = GNAT tree)
It would conceivably be possible to compile it into VERY low level C, where
you had a few variables corresponding to registers, say called r0, r1, r2
and you generated C that for example, in unoptimized mode, might
compile
A := B + C;
where A,B,C are all local variables, into something like
r0 = *(fp+100);
r1 = *(fp+104);
r2 = r0 + r1;
*(fp+108) = r2;
This is *really* using C as a low level assembler :-)
The way you could do this is to write a config file for gcc that treated
C in this way as a kind of pseudo-machine. We once thought about this as
a way to make a version of GNAT that could be ported in native mode, rather
than requiring cross-compilers, but it was never more than a passing
interesting idea.
You could try to reverse compile the tree at a much higher level into
C, but this would be a huge task, comparable to that of writing a
compiler, and in some ways much more difficult (it would be like trying
to do a complete house renovation, rather than building a new house --
as those who have gone through it know, the renovation can often be the
harder task).
Furthermore, some of the constructs would still generate rubbish, since
C just does not have the required semantic richness.
(e.g. what do you do with overflow checking, and what do you do with
nested procedures ....)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-19 0:00 ` David Weller
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
@ 1998-02-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Richard Kenner
1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Simon Wright @ 1998-02-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
dweller@universe.digex.net (David Weller) writes:
> In article <01bd3cc5$a74ff160$LocalHost@xhv46.dial.pipex.com>,
> Nick Roberts <Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> >Machine translation is certainly possible. Since GNAT produces C code (and
> >C++ is pretty well a superset of C), this suggests a possibility (doubtless
>
>
> NO NO NO NO!!!
And even if it did, it's unlikely that you would be able to make a lot
of sense of it. Names would be mangled, strange and wonderful
constructs would appear, ... (just think about exceptions, generics,
...) you would not want to maintain the result!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright
@ 1998-02-21 0:00 ` Richard Kenner
1998-03-05 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 1998-02-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <x7v1zwxtkvz.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk> Simon Wright <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk> writes:
>And even if it did, it's unlikely that you would be able to make a lot
>of sense of it. Names would be mangled, strange and wonderful
>constructs would appear, ... (just think about exceptions, generics,
>...) you would not want to maintain the result!
Actually, generics can be translated in a relatively straightforward
manner since it's just macro substitution. Exceptions are trickier,
but still can be done reasonable well. The real hard cases are
variant records and unconstrained arrays.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Richard Kenner
@ 1998-03-05 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread
From: Robert I. Eachus @ 1998-03-05 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <6cms2p$7pv$1@news.nyu.edu> kenner@lab.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) writes:
> Actually, generics can be translated in a relatively straightforward
> manner since it's just macro substitution. Exceptions are trickier,
> but still can be done reasonable well. The real hard cases are
> variant records and unconstrained arrays.
Most Ada generics are translatable as macro substitution, but the
devil is in the details. There are many instances where thunks or some
other mechanism is required to deal with freezing at the point (during
execution) of instantiation. In most cases, all that changes at
run-time are ranges or array bounds, but it is also possible for the
binding of names to subprograms to change...
--
Robert I. Eachus
with Standard_Disclaimer;
use Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1998-03-05 0:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1998-02-23 0:00 Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++ Marin David Condic, 561.796.8997, M/S 731-96
1998-02-24 0:00 ` Dale Stanbrough
1998-02-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1998-02-25 0:00 ` Jean-Pierre Rosen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1998-02-13 0:00 Ada to C++ Translators David Kusuda
1998-02-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
1998-02-16 0:00 ` David Weller
1998-02-18 0:00 ` Jean D. Ichbiah
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Delphi & Ada; Ada to C++ Nick Roberts
1998-02-19 0:00 ` David Weller
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1998-02-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1998-02-20 0:00 ` Nick Roberts
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Richard Kenner
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Simon Wright
1998-02-21 0:00 ` Richard Kenner
1998-03-05 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox