Re: Bizarre JGNAT things

[gary_the_fox@richmond.com]

Hello!
Sure, I agree with all you say:-).
However, the things I've described in the original are most likely a small bug
in JGNAT. The problem is that if the compiler seemingly behaves erroneously
if the compilation unit uses a package named, for instance, X and its own
package name is of the form P1.P2.....X....P. For instance, the units that
couldn't be compiled were child of COM.SUN.JAVA package and used JAVA top-
level package. If I moved the code into a package that is not a child package
of P1...JAVA, everything was OK. Since after the analysis of RM I've found no
indication that this is illegal in Ada, it looks like a bug (Please, correct
me if I'm wrong).

Thanks

Gary

>Andrzej Lewandowski wrote:
>> 
>> <gary_the_fox@richmond.com> wrote in message
news:9a5kqt$cnu$1@news.netmar.com...
>> > Hello!
>>  > The most bizarre thing is that happens to two files only -
>> > com-sun-java-swing-plaf-motif-MotifLookAndFeel.ads and
>> > com-sun-java-swing-plaf-windows-WindowsLookAndFeel.ads. All other files,
>> > including ones with almost identical structure, compile OK, in the same
>> > directory, with the same settings. The extremely similar
>> > javax-swing-plaf-metal-MetalLookAndFeel.ads compiles OK also.
>> >
>> > Do I do anything wrong?
>> >
>> 
>> Yes. Wrong is that you are using JGNAT. I gave up after many
>> attempts.
>> 
>
>Curious.
>
>I've got tables, trees, pop up menus, socket communications, and so on,
>all written using JGNAT and working quite nicely.  Granted, I would like
>to see a a post-1.1p release that hopefully smoothed some of the
>product's rough edges, but I find it quite usable.
>
>There's one critical aspect of JGNAT that a prospective user _must_
>understand.  If one tries to write code with JGNAT using the same
>"style" one does when writing typical Ada programs, that will likely
>work only if you're writing "isolated" code, meaning, little or no
>interaction with the JDK class library.
>
>If you're going to interface to JDK classes, as I've been doing, one
>must understand _and_conform_ (at least to some extent) with the Java
>approach.  The JDK is heavily based on inheritance and implementing
>interfaces, therefore your JGNAT compiled Ada code also has to employ
>inheritance and polymorphism much more than is typically required of Ada
>programs.
>
>My approach has been to write the core code using the standard Ada
>idioms, and then adapting to the Java way around the fringes.  This is
>in contrast to writing all the code in a Java idiom, and employing "with
>type" and coding up my own interfaces and such.  I just leave that
>latter stuff to jvm2ada.
>
>Marc A. Criley


 -----  Posted via NewsOne.Net: Free (anonymous) Usenet News via the Web  -----
  http://newsone.net/ -- Free reading and anonymous posting to 60,000+ groups
   NewsOne.Net prohibits users from posting spam.  If this or other posts
made through NewsOne.Net violate posting guidelines, email abuse@newsone.net