Re: Win32Ada

[dewar@gnat.com]

In article <364BE12F.F38A285C@cts.com>,
  dpw@cts.com wrote:
> The curious thing is how this happened in the first place
> If I understand the history correctly, Intermetrics made
> the bindings through direct government funding, so how
> did we get into a situation where taxpayers paid for
> this, as they did GNAT, and yet have to get Bill's
> permission to use it?  There must be some interesting
> story there somewhere.


By the way, the total amount of government money spent on
GNAT is far less than has been spent on other Ada
technologies that the government has directly and
indirectly funded, and most of those stay *completely*
proprietary. I don't think the fact that tax payers pay
for something has much to do with the tax payers getting
free use!

I also note that at this stage, even excluding the gcc back
end, and looking just at the Ada 95 component, the total
government funding on GNAT accounts for only a small
fraction (less than half) of the development cost of GNAT.
The remainder of the development costs have been funded
directly by Ada Core Technologies, which continues to
make substantial investments in continued development of
GNAT and related technologies.

Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own