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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,80ae596d36288e8a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!85.214.198.2.MISMATCH!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why no socket package in the standard ?
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 21:44:38 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <87y61t6yc9.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
References: <op.vvyoslycule2fv@douda-yannick>
	<9cb23235-8824-43f4-92aa-d2e8d10e7d8c@ct4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
	<4ddb5bd7$0$302$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
	<4ddb81b8$0$7628$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
	<op.vvz3hpb7ule2fv@douda-yannick> <87aaeban8a.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
	<op.vvz4zgm2ule2fv@douda-yannick> <8762ozahib.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
	<op.vv0bpcojule2fv@douda-yannick> <871uznaczz.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
	<015e3d6a-772a-41f8-a057-49c8b7bd80e1@w21g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
	<op.vv0qr4d5ule2fv@douda-yannick>
	<4MednVYCXuUZQEHQRVn_vwA@giganews.com>
	<op.vv1mmggpule2fv@douda-yannick>
	<6d913128-402e-47cc-ae3e-273b65198507@n10g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>
	<cbfc9788-b472-4c2a-b598-489b1e7ff717@g28g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
	<5acc868f-6f77-4a8d-be43-b9c926eb9c08@h9g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
	<65dd1431-c6b2-42bd-bbab-27e1ad61a6c4@32g2000vbe.googlegroups.com>
	<op.vv3pqqq5lzeukk@jellix.jlfencey.com>
	<op.vv3rqrpwule2fv@douda-yannick>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="Bc/QTq9FCm6LeLeaqNB9Yw";
	logging-data="3175"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Wsoa+s0oizFEHDhaolfo4"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:CxiG5iysFQH8m39Ov3ezqN4fdIw=
	sha1:o/Q6fOhETQ6B/7vNedGEzzFb+uw=
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19501
Date: 2011-05-26T21:44:38+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Yannick Duchêne wrote on comp.lang.ada:
> Le Thu, 26 May 2011 20:31:28 +0200, Vinzent Hoefler
> <0439279208b62c95f1880bf0f8776eeb@t-domaingrabbing.de> a écrit:
>> I'd suspect, this compiler wasn't written in FORTRAN itself, so the
>> logical conclusion would be that the compiler was witten in C (like
>> almost anything for UNIX, especially at that time) and thus 'make'
>> was written to simplify the task of compiling those compiler's
>> sources. ;)
>
> So Make was… Yet Another Compiler-Compiler ? :-D

No, Make was made over one weekend to Make Yet Another Compiler-Compiler
:)

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.