Re: How to leave .ali files in original library?

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>]

Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:

> localhost@example.org wrote on comp.lang.ada:
>>> I can't speak for the OP, but the obvious reason is that they cause
>>> vendor> lock-in. If any significant amount of your project's functionality
>>> is tied up in .GPR files, then that functionality is not portable to
>>> another Ada compiler. (.GPR files are not Ada!).
>>
>> Of course you're right but I'm only writing very small apps trying to learn
>> Ada at this point. But in principle my objection is what you said and that's
>> why I said I try not to learn non-transferrable bits because it's a waste of
>> time in my opinion.
>
> But the command-line switches of GCC and your Makefiles tailored for
> GCC are also non-transferable.  Other people have mentioned the
> proprietary build systems of Rational Apex and Janus/Ada; ObjectAda
> also has a different one.  So, your argument is valid in theory but
> moot in practice because it applies equally to all Ada toolchains and
> is not a differentiator.
>
> I argue that, lock-in for lock-in, GNAT project files are much more
> maintainable and readable than Makefiles.  And, to come back to the
> subject of this thread, they will leave .ali files in the specified
> Library_ALI_Dir by default :)

And of the build systems mentioned, they are the _least_
vendor-specific; they can be used to drive other vendor toolchains.

-- 
-- Stephe