Re: GCC conflict on Ubuntu for mixed Ada/C++ project

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

zeta_no <olivier_henley@hotmail.com> writes:

> Ok, now running on OpenSuse 11.2.  Installed GNAT2009 from Adacore
> Libre.  I exported /usr/gnat/bin to my $PATH var.
>
> When I start gps from the command line, I get:
>
> Execution terminated by unhandled exception
> Exception name: STORAGE_ERROR
> Message: stack overflow (or erroneous memory access)
> Call stack traceback locations:
> 0x8fa174b

So don't use GPS; use Emacs. AdaCore is better at compilers than at GUIs
(although the GUI does keep improving).


> On windows, except the line 15 from animals.ads (I tried it)
> everything works. 

Apparently AdaCore is aware that they can't rely on any extra packages
on windows, and includes more stuff than on Linux.

On the other hand, I did not have any trouble with GNAT 2009 on Debian
stable. 

> Note: I don't want to be unpleasant, but I have to criticized the Ada
> community for not being well organized.  

Compared to what? What other open source language community is better
organized? 

> I see a desire from the main actors to popularize Ada among
> developpers. You just have to look at the videos, conferences and news
> from AdaCore that convey the idea that Ada is strong and far from
> dead. I think there is really place for improvement, mostly on first
> contact with new developers to come. Compared to the C/C++ community,
> Ada really needs fresh blood and it is not with the kind of experience
> I went though on Linux that new people will get interested by Ada. 

I don't read the C newsgroups, not the C++ newsgroups. Are you saying
there is a lower percentage of newbies there having trouble with tools
not working?

The main problems I have with C is the non-standard libraries. Just
going from Debian to Red Hat can be a huge pain.

> I tell you, lot of my schoolmates would not even have passed the
> Ubuntu problems and get back directly to C++ with absolutely no desire
> to maybe, one day, check back at Ada. Nevertheless, I have to say that
> I find the integration on MS Windows very good.

"integration" with what? On MS Windows, GNAT 2009 is the only tool
around. 

> - First, one thing we can't argue.  Check on Distrowatch, Ubuntu is
> THE most popular distribution, by far.  I know a lot of serious
> programmer won't run on Ubuntu, but nevertheless, right after MS
> windows, the fresh blood is on Ubuntu, nowhere else.

Are we trying to attract serious programmers, or some other group of
people? When I'm looking at new people for my team, I ask if they are
comfortable with Emacs. If the answer is "tried it, didn't like it",
they are not likely to make it on my team.

> - Second, these days, in every engineering schools we learn C++ and or
> Java.  So samples and methods involving mixing Ada with C++ and Java
> code should work flawlessly.

That's a very high bar. 

I agree examples provided with tools should work. But examples of a good
tool working "flawlessly" with a bad tool is not so desireable.

> - Third, there is few, and a lot of bad tutorials around the web.

And many, many more bad C tutorials. The web is not run by any
organization; there is no way to "clean it up". 

> Check what the Python community achieved

Where, exactly? You are implying that _every_ Python tutorial on the web
is good. I'd be very surprised if that were true.

> - Finaly, I understand the community is small and maybe already makes
> its best to keep Ada alive but I think it is important to give you the
> feedback of a newbie, because, I am sure, most of the time, people
> like me just vanish without telling you why they have been put off by
> Ada.  It is not Ada the problem, it's the presentation of the
> technology which fails.

Thanks for your efforts here.

-- 
-- Stephe