Re: GNAT for MS Visual Studio

["Steve" <nospam_steved94@comcast.net>]

"Markus E L" <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> 
wrote in message news:xwir5zj8j2.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de...
[snip]
>
> I see that MS marketing already works. In your mind GUI developent is
> impossible w/o Visual studio.

You're reading me wrong here.

C# or VB on Visual Studo, Delphi and  SharpDevelop are all comparable in 
terms of effort to create a GUI.  Unless Microsoft has purchased Borland or 
Imprise ... I'm not sure what they're calling it these days) Delphi is not a 
Microsoft product.

The Microsoft Foundataion Classes used with Visual C++ in visual studio are 
horrible.  It has been since it was first released.  Borland's OWL was 10x 
better than MFC.  It's ridiculous to develop user interfaces using MFC when 
so many better tools are available.

BTW: In my opinion:  Ada is the best general purpose programming language to 
date.

Earlier in this thread it was mentioned that AdaCore has produced a dot-net 
version of GNAT.

If you haven't learned about dot-net, and you program user interfaces for 
Windows, I would recommend doing so.  It is similar to Java and Java's 
virtual machine in nature, but better, and covers all of Windows.  If you're 
programming using .NET you have a wealth of class libraries available... 
regardless of the programming language.  It should be as easy to write GUI 
user interfaces with GNAT on .NET as it is to write them in C#, VB, or Boo.

What I was trying to point out (if anyone was listening) is that there are 
tools available (for tool builders, which I'm not... its just not my forte') 
that should make it relatively easy for tool builders to include support for 
interactively building .NET forms in the Visual Studio 2005 development 
environment.

It is impractical (as Randy mentioned) for Ada tool developers to create 
their own development environments with the same capabilites as Microsoft. 
But what is practical, is to make use of the tools that Microsoft has made 
available to customize their development environment.  The same is probably 
true of Eclipse, but I am much less familiar with Eclipse.

In general, I'm not a big Microsoft fan.  When I first learned about 
developing windows applications my response was "you're kidding!".  When VB 
and Delphi came out, it made things a lot better.  In my opinion .NET has 
finally brought windows development far closer to what it should have been 
in the first place.

I was reluctant to learn C#.  It was my understanding that it was basically 
just a Microsoft rip-off of Java (in my opinion they have a history of 
copying other peoples innovations and making them their own).

I try to keep on top of new technologies as they come out so reluctantly I 
read the ECMA standard for C#.  I was suprised to find that there are 
several things that I like a lot better than Java.

Ada is my preferred programming language.  If A# or GNAT for .NET give Ada a 
better shot at a larger market, maybe I'll be able to use it more.

Regards,
Steve
(The Duck)

>
> Regards -- Markus
>
>