Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Robert Dewar]

<<What advantages can the Win95/NT version of GNAT offer me compared to
DOS GNAT?

In particular, will the Windows version allow me to draw pictures using
line/circle/box primatives in actual screen-windows with scrollbars and
menus? If so, how - is it easy?

Also, does the DOS version allow multiple tasks?>>

The DOS version allows tasks but only within a single Windows process.
The NT version maps tasks to NT threads, and also allows access to
Win32 graphics capabilities, using the win32 bindings. The win32
API is pretty complex, so no, I would not characterize this as easy!

The windows version also allows interfacing to other windows stuff.

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[tmoran]

>In particular, will the Windows version allow me to draw pictures using
>line/circle/box primatives in actual screen-windows with scrollbars and
>menus?
  There is a thin binding to Windows included so you can call Windows'
line/circle/box etc primitives, write your Windows message loop, etc.
There are Windows primitives to create menus, but if you want to use
resource files you'll need a resource compiler.

>If so, how - is it easy?
  To make it easy, you need a thick binding.  Take a look at the
Shapes demo in the Claw demo to see rectangles, ellipses, etc.  I
think there's a demo there with scrollbars too.  (I'm told a new Claw
demo version is to be posted at www.rrsoftware.com within the next
few days.) Claw works under Gnat 3.04a and I'm told it ought to work
under 3.09 for those with ACT support contracts, though it doesn't
work under the publicly released 3.09.

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Robert Dewar]

Tom Moran says

<<  To make it easy, you need a thick binding.  Take a look at the
Shapes demo in the Claw demo to see rectangles, ellipses, etc.  I
think there's a demo there with scrollbars too.  (I'm told a new Claw
demo version is to be posted at www.rrsoftware.com within the next
few days.) Claw works under Gnat 3.04a and I'm told it ought to work
under 3.09 for those with ACT support contracts, though it doesn't
work under the publicly released 3.09.>>

I do not know this to be the case. None of our customers have attempted
to run Claw as far as I know, so I have know knowledge that this works
with the current version of GNAT -- it may, but I don't think anyone
has stated that -- Tom, who told you this?

Incidentally I still don't regard this as an easy interface. It's still
a binding to a huge and messy package! Thickening up the binding only
partially changes this. Really you want a GUI builder to do most of
this stuff, you don't want to be programming it procedurally.

Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies

DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Matthew Kennedy]

Hello,

What advantages can the Win95/NT version of GNAT offer me compared to
DOS GNAT?

In particular, will the Windows version allow me to draw pictures using
line/circle/box primatives in actual screen-windows with scrollbars and
menus? If so, how - is it easy?

Also, does the DOS version allow multiple tasks?

Thanks.

-- 
Matthew Kennedy
Student of Electronics Engineering, USQ Australia
  " Hey pig, nothing's turning out the way I planned " 
      - Nine Inch Nails

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Jerry van Dijk]

>What advantages can the Win95/NT version of GNAT offer me compared to
>DOS GNAT?

That of course depends on whether you are running DOS or Win95 :-)
(and which one you know best)

In general, the current situation on publicly released versions:

1. Win95 is at 3.09, while DOS is at 3.07

2. Win95 supports long file names, the DOS version doesn't (yet)

3. The DOS versions underlying gcc port (DJGPP) is very well tested,
   documented and supported. The Win95 version isn't documented in
   practical terms.

4. The DOS version gives you access to the underlying machine, the Win95
   requires a special ($$$) SDK and writing you own bindings.

>In particular, will the Windows version allow me to draw pictures using
>line/circle/box primatives in actual screen-windows with scrollbars and
>menus? If so, how - is it easy?

Yes, if you manage to get the proper Win32 bindings, have an resource
compiler, and don't run into the infamous ld bug, you can use the GDI
from GNAT. Whether or not it is easy depends on your Win95 experience,
this is not Ada related.

>Also, does the DOS version allow multiple tasks?

Yes.

--

-- Jerry van Dijk       | Leiden, Holland
-- Business Consultant  | Team Ada
-- Ordina Finance       | jdijk@acm.org

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Jerry van Dijk]

In article <dewar.862085806@merv> dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu writes:

>The windows version also allows interfacing to other windows stuff.

Actually, DJGPP running in a DOS box can also call the Win32 runtime
system, using WinSock is a familiar example.

--

-- Jerry van Dijk       | Leiden, Holland
-- Business Consultant  | Team Ada
-- Ordina Finance       | jdijk@acm.org

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Robert Dewar]

Jerry said

<<1. Win95 is at 3.09, while DOS is at 3.07>>

     This is due to a DJGPP bug, and we do not know when this might
     be fixed. It affects only debugging of tasking programs, but the
     effect is severe.

<<2. Win95 supports long file names, the DOS version doesn't (yet)>>

     There are no plans to support long file names in the DOS version
     of GNAT. At this stage, no DOS specific enhancements of GNAT are
     likely, though new versions will appear from time.

<<3. The DOS versions underlying gcc port (DJGPP) is very well tested,
   documented and supported. The Win95 version isn't documented in
   practical terms.>>

     The documentation for the Windows version is essentially the same
     as the documentation for any other version of GNAT, and may be
     obtained from the FTP site.

<<4. The DOS version gives you access to the underlying machine, the Win95
   requires a special ($$$) SDK and writing you own bindings.>>

     You do not require the SDK unless you are going to interface to
     Win32 (the requirement here is not technical, it is a copyright
     issue, the Win32 bindings themselves do not technically require
     the SDK).

<<Yes, if you manage to get the proper Win32 bindings, have an resource
  compiler, and don't run into the infamous ld bug, you can use the GDI
  from GNAT. Whether or not it is easy depends on your Win95 experience,
  this is not Ada related.>>

    The ld problem is finally fixed, and we hope to make a public release
    of this fixed version in the near future. Meanwhile, a LOT of programs,
    especially small programs do not run into this ld bug (for example 100%
    of the ACVC tests run without encountering this problem).

<<>Also, does the DOS version allow multiple tasks? Yes.>>

   Note that these tasks in DOS are I/O blocing, In Win95 they are
   system threads.

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Jerry van Dijk]

In article <dewar.862178418@merv> dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu writes:

>Jerry said

<about running either the DOS or NT version of GNAT on Win95>

Some notes on Roberts remarks...

><<3. The DOS versions underlying gcc port (DJGPP) is very well tested,
>   documented and supported. The Win95 version isn't documented in
>   practical terms.>>
>
>     The documentation for the Windows version is essentially the same
>     as the documentation for any other version of GNAT, and may be
>     obtained from the FTP site.

As I said: "The DOS versions underlying gcc port" which has nothing to
do with GNAT but with the maturity and documentation of DJGPP vs Cygnus Win32.

><<4. The DOS version gives you access to the underlying machine, the Win95
>   requires a special ($$$) SDK and writing you own bindings.>>
>
>     You do not require the SDK unless you are going to interface to
>     Win32 (the requirement here is not technical, it is a copyright
>     issue, the Win32 bindings themselves do not technically require
>     the SDK).

As I said: "The DOS version gives you access to the underlying machine",
which has nothing to do with Win32 but with the special API's needed
(like DirectX) for Win95/NT which are currently not supported.

><<Yes, if you manage to get the proper Win32 bindings, have an resource
>  compiler, and don't run into the infamous ld bug, you can use the GDI
>  from GNAT. Whether or not it is easy depends on your Win95 experience,
>  this is not Ada related.>>
>
>    The ld problem is finally fixed, and we hope to make a public release
>    of this fixed version in the near future. Meanwhile, a LOT of programs,
>    especially small programs do not run into this ld bug (for example 100%
>    of the ACVC tests run without encountering this problem).

But note I said: 1) proper Win32 binding
                 2) resource compiler
                 3) ld bug

(1) is hopefully solved now (ie all sites carry the proper version)
(2) is not part of the current public GNAT release
(3) will be solved in the next public release

Of course, to use GNAT for pure Win95 application development, a GUI
builder is also needed. Is anyone working on this ?

BTW GNAT/NT is now my standard Ada compiler, moving back to the DOS
version only when I need to access to machine itself.

--

-- Jerry van Dijk       | Leiden, Holland
-- Business Consultant  | Team Ada
-- Ordina Finance       | jdijk@acm.org

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Pascal Obry]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1961 bytes --]



 Jerry van Dijk a �crit dans l'article <862286093.24snx@jvdsys.nextjk.stuyts
.nl>...
>In article <dewar.862178418@merv> dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu writes:

>But note I said: 1) proper Win32 binding
>                 2) resource compiler
>                 3) ld bug
>
>(1) is hopefully solved now (ie all sites carry the proper version)
>(2) is not part of the current public GNAT release
>(3) will be solved in the next public release
>

Maybe not for (1). The Win32Ada binding will fail to compile (4 or 5
packages)
with GNAT 3.10. In fact GNAT 3.10 (I'am an ACT customer and this is a
pre-release
that is not yet public) the definition of Interfaces.C.wchar_t is now a
modular type and
was (in GNAT 3.09) a Wide_Character, and this is correct because the
wchar_t is 
stated
to be <implementation_defined> in the RM. So the Win32Ada binding made a
wrong
assumption and should be fixed. I have made this fix and I did send the fix
to Mitch Gart
from Intermetrics... But I still don't have an answer from him.

So will the Win32Ada binding maintained and fixed ?
This is why I said that I'am not sure for (1).

But it is hopefully true that (3) is an old problem now !

Pascal.

--

--|------------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                               Team-Ada Member |
--|                                                           |
--| EDF-DER-IPN-SID- Ing�nierie des Syst�mes d'Informations   |
--|                                                           |
--| Bureau G1-010           e-mail: pascal.obry@der.edfgdf.fr |
--| 1 Av G�n�ral de Gaulle  voice : +33-1-47.65.50.91         |
--| 92141 Clamart CEDEX     fax   : +33-1-47.65.50.07         |
--| FRANCE                                                    |
--|------------------------------------------------------------
--|
--|   http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pascal_obry
--|
--|   "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Robert Dewar]

Pascal Obry said

<<So will the Win32Ada binding maintained and fixed ?
This is why I said that I'am not sure for (1).>>

We are attempting to make sure that the correct version gets placed on the
IC host. This is Microsoft copyrighted material, so we cannot copy it or
distribute it, but it would indeed be nice if the right version was in
the correct location. I am aware that this version does get copied from
the IC host -- we do not have any understanding that there is permission
from microsoft for such copying -- still if it does happen, it would be
nice if the right vesion were copied.

There seem to have been two big gaps in this project

1. The whole idea was to produce a version that was freely distributable.
This could have been done, but was not, with the result that Microsoft
owns the result.

2. There was no provision for continued maintenance.

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[BGaffney42]

Jerry van Dijk wrote (of GNAT/DOS vs GNAT/WinNT):
>
>2. Win95 supports long file names, the DOS version doesn't (yet)
>
I'm not sure what you mean here, I've had no problem doing this.  And I'm
not even up to 3.09
(I'm on 3.04 or some such).  Granted, I had to make one or two slight
changes:

     1. Add a default of -k256 in GNATCHOP.BAT so the chopped files have
long filenames.
          (By the way, I also had to modify it to recognize the -r option
since it never has recognized it)

     2. Add a -k256 to GNATMAKE commands (which is easier if you use a
.BAT file to 
control compilation.

The only problem I've seen is when I forget the -k256 to compile
something.  Other than that, I 
don't think there are any problems.  I'm glad GNAT likes the library files
with short names, 
cause that would have been a pain.

                                                                          
      --Bg

Re: DOS GNAT or Win95/NT GNAT? (Ada 95)

[Jerry van Dijk]

In article <19970509221401.SAA27483@ladder02.news.aol.com> bgaffney42@aol.com writes:

>Jerry van Dijk wrote (of GNAT/DOS vs GNAT/WinNT):
>>
>>2. Win95 supports long file names, the DOS version doesn't (yet)
>>
>I'm not sure what you mean here, I've had no problem doing this.  And I'm
>not even up to 3.09
>(I'm on 3.04 or some such).  Granted, I had to make one or two slight
>changes:

In GNAT/DOS the DJGPP flag controlling long filename usuage is not set,
so it uses the FAT only functions. Perhaps there is a trick to circumvent
it, but I'm very suspicous.

As I'm tinkering with the system right now, I cannot try it out.

--

-- Jerry van Dijk       | Leiden, Holland
-- Business Consultant  | Team Ada
-- Ordina Finance       | jdijk@acm.org