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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a27bd01ed18da21f
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.241.37 with SMTP id wf5mr980246pbc.4.1328781458477;
        Thu, 09 Feb 2012 01:57:38 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 wr5ni4438pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!s7g2000vby.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Rugxulo <rugxulo@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada compiler using a M2 compiler as back-end
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 01:57:38 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <8d32ea73-4126-4a44-8c28-7d921ba96e4e@s7g2000vby.googlegroups.com>
References: <abb720e9-fdc2-4a02-9318-982eec5fdf12@k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>
 <op.v9cgeu00ule2fv@douda-yannick>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.13.115.246
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1328781458 27027 127.0.0.1 (9 Feb 2012 09:57:38
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:57:38 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: s7g2000vby.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.13.115.246;
 posting-account=p5rsXQoAAAB8KPnVlgg9E_vlm2dvVhfO
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HNKUARELSC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/535.7
 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/16.0.912.77 Safari/535.7,gzip(gfe)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-02-09T01:57:38-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hi,

On Feb 7, 11:05 pm, Yannick Duch=EAne (Hibou57)
<yannick_duch...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Le Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:29:23 +0100, Gautier write-only
> <gautier_niou...@hotmail.com> a =E9crit:
>
> > Just saw that a Modula-2 compiler (Stony Brook) has been recently
> > released as freeware:
>
> >  http://modula2.org/adwm2/
>
> I wondered why Modula-2 instead of Modula-3. A quick search on the web
> suggest Modula-3 was not widely adopted as an industry standard. Does tha=
t
> mean Modula-2 is really widely adopted ?

I'm far from authoritative, but ...

Wirth developed Modula-2 as a successor to Pascal, from 1980-6, then
switched to Oberon. Modula-3 (inspired by Modula-2+) was developed
independently by DEC SRC from 1988-91. When DEC died (1997?), so did
[SRC] Modula-3 (though a few derivatives still supported it, see PM3
or CM3). Once Ada95 and C++98 were standardized (ISO), there was less
need to use Modula-3 as they had the same basic features (objects,
generics, exceptions). Even Oberon-2 (1992) has objects, dynamic
arrays, garbage collection. But Oberon was never standardized, and
even ISO Modula-2 (1996) was quite big (vs. PIM3) and unpopular with
the vendors (ahem, VDM-SL), though it did add some things (standard
libs, complex, finally, exceptions; optional: OOP and/or generics).
Also keep in mind that GCC never "officially" integrated Pascal or
Modula-3 like it did with C++ and Ada, but SRC Modula-3 and ETH Oberon
were free anyways, so that gave them some free exposure. GCC's GM2
(stabilized a year ago) is trying to partially rectify this but is
currently only for old 4.1.2.

AFAIK, the only ISO Modula-2 compilers are p1, XDS, GM2 (all still
maintained, barely). I have not tried ADW (above), so I can't say
about it.