Re: Gnat on OpenVMS

["Thierry Lelegard" <lelegard@club-internet.fr>]

> ..., and having a compiler would be much more important
> than having the best debugger.

Two points I would like to comment:
1. compiler more important than debugger
2. best debugger

1. I think that the compiler and the debugger are (almost)
equally important. Once an application is written by the
average human programmer, it usually does not work (and
PLEASE do not tell me that this not true with Ada, I have
seen horrible things in Ada due to horrible programmers).

So, you need to debug it. A very good language and a brilliant
compiler may be nice for university courses but, in the
industry, this is NUTS without a debugger.

We need the complete chain:
- source control / change management / configuration control
- editor
- compiler
- linker
- debugger
- profiler
- run-time analyzer
- crash dump analyzer

On OpenVMS, this chain is very consistent. Move from C++
to Ada (DEC Ada), you will only swap the compiler and
keep all other tools.

The problem with GNAT on OpenVMS is that it is not an
insertion in the chain (compiler replacement), it imposes
to change all the following tools in the chain. You can
only keep the previous tools (source processing).

2. "Best" debugger: I do not ask for the BEST debugger but
only for a WORKING one. And, currently, GDB is clearly not
a working tool on VMS. I sincerely hope that it will be
improved to a usable level (and, why not, to the level of
excellence). But, unless I receive evidence of the contrary,
I do not believe AT ALL that any large industrial project
has been debugged on OpenVMS with GNAT/GDB.

-Thierry
________________________________________________________
Thierry Lelegard, Paris, France
E-mail: lelegard@club-internet.fr