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: Robert Dewar Subject: Re: JAVA and ADA JGNAT Date: 2000/02/05 Message-ID: <87i7rm$l7a$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 582037293 References: <862sv5$sug$1@pirates.Armstrong.EDU> <862t3o$9aa1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <86k8r6$alp$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <86kpbu$aik1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <86la8r$519$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <877lgxuquu.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org> <86mqi6$6dd$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <87n1pswjz0.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x35.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Feb 05 22:22:49 2000 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 2000-02-05T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <87n1pswjz0.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>, Florian Weimer wrote: > I've misread this statement, I think. The explanation by Robert Dewar > that followed but which I neglected to quote made it quite clear that > he meant that most of the code Cygnus develops for their customers > never makes it into the public GCC version, and this seems to be true. > > On the other hand, the development process of the *public* GCC version > hosted by Cygnus is much more open than the GNAT development process. The GNAT development process inside ACT clearly corresponds to the internal development at Cygnus, with one important difference which is that EVERYTHING we do at ACT makes it into the next public release of GNAT. That's always been true, and will continue to be true. Now what is missing is a public tree for GNAT that people could play with. Note that until very recently, the same was true for GDB, and it is definitely a disadvantage for GDB, why? Because a substantial amount of GDB development is going on outside Cygnus, and there needs to be a public tree which can act as the focus for this distributed development. It is also no secret that the intention is to establish a council for GDB, similar to the council for GCC (in fact I acted as convenor for the first couple of organizational meetings). With GNAT, the development so far has gone on pretty much entirely within ACT, and no other companies until quite recently have got involved. This means that there has not been the push to get a public tree going that existed with GDB (a group of nine or so full time people working on GDB at a company like HP is a considerably different story from a couple of hobbyists who would like to hack around with GNAT on a part time basis). Nevertheless, it certainly seems desirable to have a public tree, and as part of the GNU project, we have decided to center this effort around GNU/Linux, which is why the GNAT/Linux team seems the right organization to do this. It's making slow progress partly because we are talking about people working in their spare time, and partly because it won't really work nicely until GNAT is fully merged into the new FSF version of GCC, something that, as I said, we are working on! Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.