Re: Overriding discriminants perplexes GNAT 3.14p

[Dmitry A.Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

Stephen Leake wrote:

> Dmitry A.Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> 
>> I wished to get GNAT Pro, but alas it is unavailable for our targed
>> platform. So before investing a huge amount of bucks we are trying to
>> validate existing compilers with respect of our software design. The
>> result is rather disappointing. It comes to finding a language subset
>> which more than one compiler are capable to digest. Looks like a typical
>> C-case, isn't it?
> 
> Why do you need more than one compiler? Hmm, perhaps developement on
> the host computer, then deliver to the target.

This is exactly what we are doing.

To have more than one compiler is important to ensure portability across 
many compilers-platforms. This is one of the major requirements of our 
product. The target platforms we use have limited life time. They disappear 
after 5-7 years. So the software should be portable, and well, you never 
know which compiler will be used then.

>> Note also the situation. We must "sell" Ada to our customers while
>> they in general do not want Ada [for many reasons, but mostly
>> because of ignorance]. When I talk to them I point that Ada is
>> portable, available, certifyed, safe, that they will be
>> vendor/platform-independent. This sometimes impresses them, because
>> they have had experience with the "ever-green" C. Do I lie them?
> 
> No language is _completely_ "portable, available, certified, safe".

The language is, but its implementations? That's the problem.

> Ada is _more_ of these than C. Say that instead.

Do not forget, I must persuade customers which are extremely sceptical to 
Ada.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry Kazakov
www.dmitry-kazakov.de