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,caf3540cc6de9952 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!v42g2000yqv.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "RasikaSrinivasan@gmail.com" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Every little bit helps - Publicity in Embedded Systems Development Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 04:38:35 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <5e15b2a4-66a0-45d6-8da8-ad3ed6352383@v5g2000pre.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.216.109.119 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1233319115 4601 127.0.0.1 (30 Jan 2009 12:38:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:38:35 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: v42g2000yqv.googlegroups.com; posting-host=98.216.109.119; posting-account=mZyFSQoAAABfOmklsh1d8TPbS2LncUKl User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.5) Gecko/2008120122 Firefox/3.0.5,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3525 Date: 2009-01-30T04:38:35-08:00 List-Id: I didnt realize IBM had an Ada compiler. Is this based on gnat? (I will now go to google) Any case what does "full SDK" Ada mean? Packages to O/S like starlet used to be for VMS? On Jan 30, 4:19=A0am, a...@anon.org (anon) wrote: > Except for a few OS like Linux or the many favors of BSD, a software > developer have to pay extra to get the tools to access the full features = of > the OS, even if a free or low cost compiler is provided. =A0These tools w= ith > documentation are normally call a Software Development Kit (SDK). > > And if you check with IBM, they have two version of Ada. One is a CDROM > compiler only version which sells for less than $200.00 with what they > call a media license. =A0But the full SDK Ada version starts around $15K = per > year which is about the same price for Adacore's GNAT Pro. > > So, compilers may be cheap but you will pay and pay big for the addition > of the SDK. > > I just wish that Adacore would think about offering the Ravenscar subsyst= em > as a separate package that may be free or they could charge a onetime fee > for a non-updatable version of the package. > > Now, as for the article well its like a reviewer says the movie is Great,= but > there is no valid information on why its GREAT! > > In , Martyn Pike writes: > > >RasikaSriniva...@gmail.com wrote: > >>http://www.embedded.com/212902632?cid=3DNL_embedded > > >An interesting article, but is it 100% accurate ? > > >*Some* free tools maybe but I disagree with the implication that all > >those ports to most mainstream 16 and 32 bit CPUs are free. > > >As far as I am aware, the profiles referenced here > >(http://www.adacore.com/home/gnatpro/toolsuite/runtimes/) are not free, > >not licensed by the GPL and only available to GNAT Pro customers ? > > >If I call Adacore up and say : > > >"Where can I download a pre-built binary free/GPL version of GNAT that > >is hosted on Windows but cross compiles to PowerPC and gives me a > >Ravenscar Profile compliant runtime for my hypothetical barebones hobby > >project ?" > > >I would be told those requirements mean I needed a GNAT Pro subscription > >which is not free. > > >I quote the article : > > > > Tasking is a built-in feature, not a bolt-on requiring > > > expensive dalliances with RTOS vendors > > >Those expensive dalliances still exist, but I feel the Ada developer > >actually pays twice. =A0They pay the RTOS vendor for the OS license and > >stock tools and then they have to pay Adacore for the Ada tools that > >layer GNARL/GNULL ontop of the RTOS. > > >If I chose the language supported by the RTOS vendors stock tools > >(invariably C/C++) then I only pay the RTOS vendor. =A0Albeit I would pa= y > >in blood, sweat and tears later on in my project lifecycle ! > > >It is very confusing for me, as an Ada developer, to read an article > >like this and not feel like new converts to the Ada cause are being spam= med. > > >Please correct me if I am wrong. =A0I am not knocking Jack Ganssle or > >Adacore for their efforts but I find this article slightly misleading. > > >Martyn > >