Re: Ada -vs- GNAT

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

Well, not exactly. Its not quite "Embrace & Extend" if the standard allows
implementation defined things to happen. Ada permits extensions via pragmas
and attributes that are compiler specific. Presumably different compilers
can then discover that they are looking at an attribute or pragma that they
don't understand/support and give you an intelligent message about it. Also,
the language would allow for non-standard syntax & semantics so long at the
compiler can be put in a mode wherein it will compile "standard" Ada - which
is something GNAT does. So its O.K. for ACT to create product distinction by
adding non-standard things in a standard way. Other compiler developers are
similarly free to do so. I don't see how this hurts anything in the way
that, for example, Microsoft does by having a C++ compiler that won't
compile "standard" C++. At least with Ada you know what you can basically
count on having available in any compiler. That's a very different thing
than attempting to use "standard" C++ & discovering that the compiler says
"We know this ought to work, but we decided to do it *our* way instead, so
go rewrite your code..." The latter amounts to inventing a new language.

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com


"Stephen Leake" <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote in message
news:u4rgsjgx4.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov...
>
> > This could be one of the features that differentiates their product
> > from that of other compiler publishers.
>
> That's the Microsoft way. The true ACT way is to distinguish their
> real product (which is support and service) by delivering better
> quality.
>