Re: Gnat on OpenVMS

[nickerson@pundit.ds.boeing.com ()]

In article <7ht4m2$4k7$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
 Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com> writes:
|>One more comment on GDB on VMS. In the long run, we think that
|>the DEC decision here was the right one. The big advantage of
|>using GDB on the VMS port is that it is fully Ada 95 compatible,
|>something that could not have been achieved with the existing
|>VMS debugger, since DEC was not in a position to do the
|>necessary Ada 95 modifications. By using Dwarf-2 as the
|>format for debugging information, we can take full advantage
|>of the GNAT encodings and provide complete Ada 95 information
|>to GDB. We find GDB to work well on VMS (it was used extensively
|>to debug the compiler itself), and we are confident that Canal
|>Plus problems (only reported in the last few weeks) can in fact
|>be solved, there do not seem to be any fundamental difficulties
|>as far as we can see.
|>
|>Robert Dewar
|>Ada Core Technologies

wrong; totally & utterly wrong direction; DEC made what I would
imagine is a $ decision; you should not subsequently call that
(by implication) the correct technical decision; 

GDB may be Ada95 knowledgeable but it is nowhere close to the
VMS debugger in capablity & usablity; based on my brief trials 
with GDB (full screen) it will never get close; that opinion
coupled with GDB not being the native OS debugger gives a drastic 
fault in GNAT's applicablity; (but then it is the only game in 
town for Ada95);

--bn (Bart Nickerson)
nickerson@pundit.ds.boeing.com
(206) 662-0183