just beginning...

just beginning...

[Gwen Ricker]

I need a little information and alot of help...
I have been taking a computer programming class in college concerning
programming basics and ADA 95 is the language being used.  We have been
using the GNAT complier but I found out about Object ADA 7.1 and downloaded
it.
My GNAT compiler has no debugger while ADA 7.1 does.  I had much rather use
ADA 7.1 as I like the language and intend to take a class next semester that
focuses on the language.
My problem is I am not sure if the programs I have written in ADA 95 will
compile and run in ADA 7.1....(of course I don't have that many that
work.)due to the package names that are listed in the ADA 95 programs.
The last assignment I had a lot of problems with and would like to get the
program running...but there are some procedures that I need help
with...anyone willing to take a look at it?
I didn't post the source code because it is long and I really want help with
it...not wanting someone to write the remainder for me...:)
I am a non-traditional student and am very sincere in my desire to become an
ADA programmer.  I realize I will have to learn other languages eventually,
but with the option of being able to incorporate them into ADA code.
Any assistance would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Gwen

Re: just beginning...

[dewarr]

In article <7378qo$h7v@apple.telalink.net>,
  "Gwen Ricker" <gricker@writeme.com> wrote:
> My GNAT compiler has no debugger

A debugger is indeed available for GNAT, go to any of the
usual GNAT download sites (e.g. cs.nyu.edu, ftp directories
pub/gnat) to find a copy for your system (most likely you
are using Win9x or NT, and indeed a debugger is available
for that platform for GNAT).

Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies

P.S. We now expect 3.11p to be out sometime this coming
week or early the following week if all goes smoothly. This
version comes packaged with a much more advanced version of
this debugger!

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Re: just beginning...

[The Ludwig Family]

There are several points of confusion here.

First of all, the correct orthography for the language is "Ada", not "ADA", 
because the name of the language is taken from the name of an individual 
(Augusta Ada Byron, Countess of Lovelace) and is not an acronym.

There are only two versions of the language (ignoring the first definition 
in MIL-STD-1815, which had problems with implementation).  The two versions 
are commonly referred to as Ada 83 (with official definitional documentation 
being ANSI/MIL-STD-1815A [1983, from which the "83" notation is taken] and 
ISO/IEC 8652:1987) and Ada 95 (with official definitional documentation 
being ANSI/ISO/IEC 8652:1995).  The latter is the one you are using and is 
the newer definition, which supersedes the former definition.

What you are calling "Ada 7.1" as the language you are preferring and 
wondering "if the programs I have written in ADA 95 will compile and run 
in ADA 7.1" is in fact ObjectAda 7.1, the name of a tool set by Aonix 
implementing Ada 95.  GNAT is another tool set implementing Ada 95, just 
by a competitor of Aonix, namely ACT.

Therefore, if your code runs successfully using GNAT, then it should run 
using ObjectAda 7.1, subject to certain caveats:  GNAT implements all 
optional annexes of the language definition, whereas ObjectAda does not; 
if your code uses any of the features in the optional annexes which are not 
supported by Object Ada (generally unlikely for new students of Ada), then 
your code most likely will not run.  All compilers for all languages have 
some errors, because of the complexity of the software involved; in your 
case, the GNAT compiler may have accepted code it should not, or ObjectAda 
may fail code it should accept, so you might encounter an issue there.  
Also, there are aspects of the language that compilers are allowed to vary 
and "do their own thing", such as the range of the predefined types Integer 
and Float (with precision level also being an issue), whether any additional 
integer or floating types are provided (and, if so, their names), additional 
pragmas beyond what the language requires, etc.; if your code depends on any 
of these features in GNAT, then it might not run the way you expect in 
ObjectAda.

Also, there is a debugger with GNAT, namely gdb, which is part of the gnu 
gcc tool set.  An Ada-cognizant version comes with the GNAT tool kit which 
you download off the Internet.

By the way, I find that debuggers are generally less useful for Ada than for 
other languages because a common cause for errors is type mismatches, a 
class of errors which the Ada compiler catches for you.

You did not say what system you are running on.  If it is a PC using DOS, 
the "ez2load" download of GNAT also provides two interactive development 
environments, one with a Borland Turbo look and feel, the other with a 
Microsoft Visual look and feel.  If you are on a PC using Windows 95 or 
NT, you can use AdaGIDE.

I hope this helps.

Howard W. LUDWIG, Ph.D.

Gwen Ricker wrote:
> 
> I need a little information and alot of help...
> I have been taking a computer programming class in college concerning
> programming basics and ADA 95 is the language being used.  We have been
> using the GNAT complier but I found out about Object ADA 7.1 and downloaded
> it.
> My GNAT compiler has no debugger while ADA 7.1 does.  I had much rather use
> ADA 7.1 as I like the language and intend to take a class next semester that
> focuses on the language.
> My problem is I am not sure if the programs I have written in ADA 95 will
> compile and run in ADA 7.1....(of course I don't have that many that
> work.)due to the package names that are listed in the ADA 95 programs.
> The last assignment I had a lot of problems with and would like to get the
> program running...but there are some procedures that I need help
> with...anyone willing to take a look at it?
> I didn't post the source code because it is long and I really want help with
> it...not wanting someone to write the remainder for me...:)
> I am a non-traditional student and am very sincere in my desire to become an
> ADA programmer.  I realize I will have to learn other languages eventually,
> but with the option of being able to incorporate them into ADA code.
> Any assistance would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> Gwen

Re: just beginning...

[dennison]

In article <7378qo$h7v@apple.telalink.net>,
  "Gwen Ricker" <gricker@writeme.com> wrote:

> My problem is I am not sure if the programs I have written in ADA 95 will
> compile and run in ADA 7.1....(of course I don't have that many that
> work.)due to the package names that are listed in the ADA 95 programs.

I notice a lot of folks are encouraging you to stick with GNAT. I say if
ObjectAda is more comfortable for you, use that. All compilers are
going to have some differences in the code they will accept, but I have found
those two compilers very compatable. You are not liable to run into many
differences in any code you would have to write for an introductory course.

Some points to consider:  o  As others have mentioned, there *is* a debugger
for gnat available for download. I have used it on my home PC and found it
somewhat unstable, but very good.  o  If you go with ObjectAda, I suggest you
stick to gnat's naming convention for your source files. That will save you a
little work should you have to use gnat in the future.	o  The free version
of ObjectAda has limitations on the size your application can be. If your
class has a large programming project, this may become a problem.

--
T.E.D.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own    

Re: just beginning...

[Dale Stanbrough]

   "Gwen Ricker" <gricker@writeme.com> wrote:
 > My GNAT compiler has no debugger


If this compiler is installed at your University, then I would ask
the technical people if they could install the associated debugger
as well, or just wait until 3.11 comes out (as Robert Dewar has 
suggested) and then ask them to install that.

Alternatively, try doing without a debugger at all. I rarely use
debuggers, I find that putting Put_Line statements (not Put!) into
my code, and thinking to be a worthwhile alternative. Your milage
may vary, of course.

Dale