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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,ba3d134fb7efbf1d
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ba3d134fb7efbf1d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: ADA to C++ translator
Date: 1996/07/15
Message-ID: <dewar.837433385@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 168423025
references: <31E51319.41C6@taec.enet.dec.com> <31EA1575.176C@dra.hmg.gb>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-07-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Simon said

"I think that the GNU Ada95 works by a translation to C (AFAIR)."


Hmmm! I think Simon has not been reading this newsgroup for very long :-)

The answer to this FQM (frequently quoted misconception) is that GNAT in
no way works by translation to C. There is no C code, nor any internal
intermediate code in any sense equivalent to C at any point in the
compilation process. Therefore GNAT is completely useless for the purposes
of translating Ada 95 to C.