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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ddf5660e3e8010b1
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!j25g2000vbr.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: ada commercial options
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <c948ad18-03ef-4a9c-bebd-6fe8c750cfad@j25g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <5f171139-8296-4c7c-bc24-02885eadd260@dr5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
 <op.vt5c71iqlzeukk@jellix.jlfencey.com>
 <77c9c293-9fd3-4f3b-a754-83bf3d3be487@p16g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>
 <ionpv7$f7t$1@munin.nbi.dk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.3.40.82
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1303366728 12710 127.0.0.1 (21 Apr 2011 06:18:48
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 06:18:48 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: j25g2000vbr.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.3.40.82;
 posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13,gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:19908
Date: 2011-04-20T23:18:48-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Apr 21, 1:24=A0am, "Randy Brukardt" <ra...@rrsoftware.com> wrote:

> The vast majority of "libraries" written for GNAT aren't portable enough =
to
> use on other compilers, even if they only use Ada 95 features. In my
> opinion, a library isn't portable unless it is compiled on at least two
> different Ada compilers.

How are the library writers supposed to compile their products on at
least two different Ada compilers if there is only one? You're asking
for impossible.

(We have 2011 now, so we're talking Ada 2005.)

> Supposedly, the IBM compiler supports Ada 2005. (They issued an announcem=
ent
> to the effect last year.) It might be hard to buy a copy, though (it's ha=
rd
> to find it on their website).

OK, so there is supposedly a product that the company does not want to
sell. In particular, library writers have no chance of testing their
software with it. Virtual products don't count.

> The latest version of Janus/Ada supports all of the Ada 2005 syntax and s=
ome
> of the features.

According to Google search, the RRSoftware website contains the word
"2005" only here:

http://www.rrsoftware.com/html/prodinf/tf/

;-)

And, let's be frank, supporting only syntax is a step in the right
direction, but still nowhere close to a working compiler.

That leaves us with 1 compiler on the market.

--
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.msobczak.com * http://www.inspirel.com