Ada 95

Ada 95

[AlanVPham]

Does anyone has Ada 95 or know where I can download Ada 95?
Thank you,

Re: Ada 95

[John Lindsay]

AlanVPham wrote:
> 
> Does anyone has Ada 95 or know where I can download Ada 95?
> Thank you,

    http://www.gnat.com

Follow the links to the download from  ftp://ftp.nyu.edu  
or its several mirrors.  Look for the version of GNAT ( = 
*N*ew York University *G*nu *A*da *T*ranslator) for your 
machine and OS.  This is one of the Gnu compilers, utilities, 
etc., is free to use, and the source code is available.  
But its covered by the Free Software Foundation's famous 
'copy left' (as opposed to copyright), and one can't use it 
for profit without further arrangements; further if you use 
the source code to create something else, that something 
else becomes covered by the same copy left.  It is a truly 
first class compiler, and the WNT/W95 version has an 
excellent IDE contributed by a user.

Also, the above web site points to extensive Ada reference 
material.  Good luck.

-- 
All the best !

John H. Lindsay, Assistant Professor,
DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTER SCIENCE
ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE OF CANADA
PO BOX 17000  STN FORCES
KINGSTON   ON   K7K7B4   CANADA

e-mail:              Lindsay_J@RMC.CA
Phone:               (613) 541-5010-6419
Fax:                 (613) 542-8129

Re: Ada 95

[Robert Dewar]

John said

<<Follow the links to the download from  ftp://ftp.nyu.edu
or its several mirrors.  Look for the version of GNAT ( =
*N*ew York University *G*nu *A*da *T*ranslator) for your
machine and OS.  This is one of the Gnu compilers, utilities,
etc., is free to use, and the source code is available.
But its covered by the Free Software Foundation's famous
'copy left' (as opposed to copyright), and one can't use it
for profit without further arrangements; further if you use
the source code to create something else, that something
else becomes covered by the same copy left.  It is a truly
first class compiler, and the WNT/W95 version has an
excellent IDE contributed by a user.>>

A couple of corrections. First of all, GNAT stands for nothing at this
stage, the acronym above is out of date, NYU no longer has any connection
whatever with GNAT, and we found that the "Translator" part confused
people, so the above acronym is hereby disclaimed permanently.

Second, AdaGIDE was created by Martin Carlisle with the support of
the Air Force Academy, where it is used for teaching Ada in their
courses using GNAT. ACT is working closely with Martin, and ACT
fully supports this product, it is not in the contributed software
category (which for us implies no support of any kind). The distribution
of GNAT is now integrated with the distribution of AdaGIDE>

Note that there are several other good IDE's that work with GNAT,
including GRASP, and of course EMACS with Ada mode. 

Re: Ada 95

[Simon Wright]

John Lindsay <lindsay_j@rmc.ca> writes re GNAT:

>                  This is one of the Gnu compilers, utilities, 
> etc., is free to use, and the source code is available.  
> But its covered by the Free Software Foundation's famous 
> 'copy left' (as opposed to copyright), and one can't use it 
> for profit without further arrangements;

If you compile your own Ada source using GNAT, you can do what you
please with it;

>                                          further if you use 
> the source code to create something else, that something 
> else becomes covered by the same copy left.

The compiler itself is subject to the GNU copyright statement.
The runtime library has special provisions which allow you to
instantiate generics from it and bind to it without imposing any
restrictions on the resulting executable.

Re: Ada 95 - the interpretation of the Gnu 'copy left'

[John Lindsay]

Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> John Lindsay <lindsay_j@rmc.ca> writes re GNAT:
> 
> >                  This is one of the Gnu compilers, utilities,
> > etc., is free to use, and the source code is available.
> > But its covered by the Free Software Foundation's famous
> > 'copy left' (as opposed to copyright), and one can't use it
> > for profit without further arrangements;
> 
> I find it a bit surprising that John would be confused in this way. This
> is of course quite incorrect. Anyone can use GNAT to build any kind of
> programs at all, proprietary, classified etc. There are no restrictions
> of any kind placed on programs generated by GNAT, and the runtime is
> explicitly licensed in a manner that ensures that no restrictions are
> engendered by the use of this runtime.
> 
> Robert Dewar
> Ada Core Technologies

Well, this is good; thanks to Robert and one other who 
corrected my understanding.  But I read a copy of the 
'copy left' some time ago with exactly this question and 
a related question - can the Gnu compilers &c. be used to 
create software to be distributed at all without also 
distributing the whole particular Gnu package used to 
create it - in mind.  My understanding (incorrect - separate 
arrangements needed to use for profit, correct - no need to 
redistribute the whole thing) came from that reading.  
The copy left is verbose, perhaps necessarily so, and 
perhaps it has been reworked since I read it.  I wonder if 
a short 1-paragraph plain English explanation is needed to 
accompany it, not in any way replacing or modifying the 
full 'legal' text.

-- 
All the best !

John H. Lindsay, Assistant Professor,
DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTER SCIENCE
ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE OF CANADA
PO BOX 17000  STN FORCES
KINGSTON   ON   K7K7B4   CANADA

e-mail:              Lindsay_J@RMC.CA
Phone:               (613) 541-5010-6419
Fax:                 (613) 542-8129

Re: Ada 95 - the interpretation of the Gnu 'copy left'

[Robert Dewar]

John Lindsay said

<<Well, this is good; thanks to Robert and one other who
corrected my understanding.  But I read a copy of the
'copy left' some time ago with exactly this question and
a related question - can the Gnu compilers &c. be used to
create software to be distributed at all without also
distributing the whole particular Gnu package used to
create it - in mind.  My understanding (incorrect - separate
arrangements needed to use for profit, correct - no need to
redistribute the whole thing) came from that reading.
The copy left is verbose, perhaps necessarily so, and
perhaps it has been reworked since I read it.  I wonder if
a short 1-paragraph plain English explanation is needed to
accompany it, not in any way replacing or modifying the
full 'legal' text.
>>


I don't think a one paragraph summary would be likely to be helpful. I 
think most people understand quite clearly that the issue arises with
runtime routines only (to think that the GPL somehow covers the *output*
of the compiler makes no sense at all. Think by analogy, suppose I gave
you a GPL'ed financial program, comparable to Quicken, do you think the
fact that it was under the GPL means that you have to distribute your
checking records to the world, certainly not. The fact that the output
of a compiler is object code rather than checks makes no difference!

The only issue is the runtime, but the runtime is not under the GPL, due
to the special exception paragraph:

-- GNAT is free software;  you can  redistribute it  and/or modify it under --
-- terms of the  GNU General Public License as published  by the Free Soft- --
-- ware  Foundation;  either version 2,  or (at your option) any later ver- --
-- sion.  GNAT is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITH- --
-- OUT ANY WARRANTY;  without even the  implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY --
-- or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU General Public License --
-- for  more details.  You should have  received  a copy of the GNU General --
-- Public License  distributed with GNAT;  see file COPYING.  If not, write --
-- to  the Free Software Foundation,  59 Temple Place - Suite 330,  Boston, --
-- MA 02111-1307, USA.                                                      --
--                                                                          --
-- As a special exception,  if other files  instantiate  generics from this --
-- unit, or you link  this unit with other files  to produce an executable, --
-- this  unit  does not  by itself cause  the resulting  executable  to  be --
-- covered  by the  GNU  General  Public  License.  This exception does not --
-- however invalidate  any other reasons why  the executable file  might be --
-- covered by the  GNU Public License.                                      --
--                                                                          --
-- GNAT was originally developed  by the GNAT team at  New York University. --
-- It is now maintained by Ada Core Technologies Inc (http://www.gnat.com). --

Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies

Re: Ada 95

[Robert Dewar]

John Lindsay <lindsay_j@rmc.ca> writes re GNAT:

>                  This is one of the Gnu compilers, utilities,
> etc., is free to use, and the source code is available.
> But its covered by the Free Software Foundation's famous
> 'copy left' (as opposed to copyright), and one can't use it
> for profit without further arrangements;

I find it a bit surprising that John would be confused in this way. This
is of course quite incorrect. Anyone can use GNAT to build any kind of
programs at all, proprietary, classified etc. There are no restrictions
of any kind placed on programs generated by GNAT, and the runtime is
explicitly licensed in a manner that ensures that no restrictions are
engendered by the use of this runtime.

Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies

Re: Ada 95 - the interpretation of the Gnu 'copy left'

[John H. Lindsay]

I had written:
....  snip ....
>                                                                  I wonder if
> a short 1-paragraph plain English explanation is needed to
> accompany [the Gnu Public Licence]  ....

Robert Dewar replied: 
> I don't think a one paragraph summary would be likely to be helpful. I
> think most people understand quite clearly that the issue arises with
> runtime routines only (to think that the GPL somehow covers the *output*
> of the compiler makes no sense at all. ....
[ Robert compared the situation to the use of other (non-compiler)
programs.]

I agree, it makes no sense from my point of view and from others' point
of 
view too I say, but restricting the use of the run-time and the compiler 
output is possible, and I've seen it done, darn it all.
 
> ....                but the runtime is not under the GPL, due
> to the special exception paragraph:
....  snip  ....
> -- As a special exception,  if other files  instantiate  generics from this --
> -- unit, or you link  this unit with other files  to produce an executable, --
> -- this  unit  does not  by itself cause  the resulting  executable  to  be --
> -- covered  by the  GNU  General  Public  License.  This exception does not --
> -- however invalidate  any other reasons why  the executable file  might be --
> -- covered by the  GNU Public License.                                      --
....  snip  ....

Ahh !  So !  It's not covered.  Good.  Thanks.

-- 
John H. Lindsay                                lindsay_j@rmc.ca
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE OF CANADA
P O BOX 17000  STN FORCES
KINGSTON  ON   K7K 7B4   CANADA

Phone: (613) 541-5010--6419
Fax:   (613) 541-6584