Re: JAVA and ADA JGNAT

[Jean-Marc Bourguet <bourguet@my-deja.com>]

In article <X_Fj4.425$0o4.13328@cmnws01.we.mediaone.net>,
  Pascal Martin <pascal.martin@iname.com.nospam> wrote:
> In article <86mqi6$6dd$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Jean-Marc Bourguet
<bourguet@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > And how many bugs have you not struggled with because the quality
> > control of ACT is better that what it is possible to do with a
> > more open development?
>
> This is the reverse, actually: GNAT is very difficult to build.

First, I see little correlation between the quality of a program and
the difficulty to build it, especially when like GNAT parts of the
program is written in different languages.

Secondly, the only time I tried to compile GNAT, I succeeded without
problem, so I can't even agree with the fact the GNAT is difficult
to build.

> IMHO GNAT would have tremendeously benefited from an open development
> model, as it would have forced GNAT developpers to fix their build
> process.

What would have be the benefit of a simpler build process? Until now
people complaining on the "closed" gnat development are complaining not
because they can't work on gnat (ALT proove that it is possible) but
that they can't get the very latest version.

[...]
> I believe GNAT is Dewar's brainchild, and he has a parental crisis: he
> do not want the kid to leave the house. Is he still reviewing all the
> GNAT code that's checked in ?

I sure hope all the code checked in GNAT is reviewed. I sure hope that
the new feature are designed and then coded (by the way, if I wanted
to work on gnat, it is more for the lack of avaibillity of design
documents that I'd be complaining).

Yours,

-- Jean-Marc


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.