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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00, LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7ee10ec601726fbf X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-11 12:32:08 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: why not Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 15:20:52 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9q4rel$23p$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <3BC30674.BA88AAB6@brighton.ac.uk> <9pvv3t$ves$1@news.huji.ac.il> <9q49fc$nh3$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9q4dnk017fg@drn.newsguy.com> <9q4fr6$qj5$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9q4m4t$t4n$1@nh.pace.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1002828053 2169 136.170.200.133 (11 Oct 2001 19:20:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Oct 2001 19:20:53 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14322 Date: 2001-10-11T19:20:53+00:00 List-Id: Being able to compile them and being willing to distribute them are two different things. I could imagine lots of business reasons why a vendor might say "thanks, but no thanks" to the suggestion that they bundle someone else's software in with their compiler distribution. Observation: The Booch Components have been available on the Net for some time now and IIRC, they were available under a license very similar to (if not identical to) the one used for the Gnat runtime code. (IOW, no big legal restrictions to prevent a vendor from using them.) Yet in all that time, how many vendors have packaged the BCs with their compiler? By my count, that number would look amazingly a lot like "zero" (correct my count if you know of one that does...). Why not? They're "available". They "add value". They "cost nothing". Since I don't believe the vendors are either a) Stupid or b) Ignorant (of the existence of the BCs.) I've got to believe there is some reason they don't already do this. (Quality? Implied willingness to support? Implied endorsement? Insufficient components/documentation? Waiting for a winner to emerge? Product distinction? Not Invented Here?) That is why I think it would be valuable to hear the vendor's opinions on what is required of some potential component library. Get three or four vendors willing to say "If you guys build something like this.... we'll distribute it with the compiler..." and then you've really got something. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Ted Dennison" wrote in message news:E_lx7.24944$ev2.33842@www.newsranger.com... > > I suspect so. I already consider it a sort of demi-requirement that my compilers > properly compile Booch. Given that they use nested generics and classes, this > isn't as trivial a requirement as it might sound. >