Re: Inspirels Ada on cortex tutorial linker issue

[Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>]

>  From a practical point of view, configuring a piece of
> stereotypical C code means autoc***.

Nonsense. I have written C and C++ code for multiple platforms and have never used autoconf (if this is what you mean), not even once. In fact, I have never understood, actually, why people are using it at all.

So you are having problems with a tool that you associate with some programming language by means of stereotypical relations and you claim what exactly? That Ada is better, because it does not have any such tools that were created for C and which you do not need to use anyway? I like Ada, but I must be missing some of the religious part of it.

> They seem to
> be using it

Who is "they"? The C language standard does not mention them.
Don't blame the language for something that exists outside of it. If autotools do not work for you, it's not the fault of C and certainly it is not the Ada feature, either.

> OTOH, if ever there have been standardized Ada build systems,

Good point. Ada does not even have a consistent convention for naming its source files.

> Isn't this helpful when solving
> certain problems of order, and of timing, when part A of a program
> needs part B of the program to be in a ready state?
> How would you do the same using C with Make, and formally so?

When I need this kind of relationship, it is usually much more complex than can be achieved with elaboration control. Talk about ensuring existence of live database connection pool, for example. Or, on the other side of the application spectrum, about ensuring the proper clock configuration of your microcontroller before you start using its peripherals. Ada's elaboration control is neither required nor sufficient for managing relationships at the level of complexity that is actually interesting in real-life applications.

-- 
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com