From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2e91a32061bde112 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ted Dennison Subject: Re: JAVA and ADA JGNAT Date: 2000/01/26 Message-ID: <86ncqt$l0p$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 577906674 References: <862sv5$sug$1@pirates.Armstrong.EDU> <862t3o$9aa1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <86k8r6$alp$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <86kpbu$aik1@news.cis.okstate.edu> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x29.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Jan 26 18:02:09 2000 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDtedennison Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) Date: 2000-01-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Preben Randhol wrote: > As for compilers I think this is even more crucial. I would rather > have a JGNAT that works well than an alpha product that makes the > programs crash a lot and thus gets a bad reputation. But it might be > that I for general OS products expect them to be alpha or beta and > crash a lot, I don't expect compilers to do the same. :-) When Gnat was first under development it was released early and often. I remember trying out a version sometime around '94 that had no tasking support and was riddled with bugs. Even in '95 it was not uncommon to get bugs in simple assignments that involved no new Ada95 features. I think Gnat *did* get somewhat of a bad reputation from those early releases. So perhaps ACT's current policy is a reaction to that. -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.