* GnatBench (from GPL edition) @ 2008-03-20 16:35 John McCabe 2008-03-20 16:46 ` John McCabe 2008-04-29 9:34 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 2 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-20 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw) I've just installed the GPL version of GNAT, with Gnatbench 2.0.1 into Eclipse. I created a new Ada project, a "Hello World" one, and set the toolchain to gnatmake. When I try to build it I get: "Could not execute command 'make GPRPATH="C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj\AdaStartProj.gpr" build" Does anyone know why that is? Why is it not trying to run gnatmake directly? Does it make a difference that I'm using Eclipse Europa (3.3.1.1) and CDT 4.0.2? Thanks John ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-20 16:35 GnatBench (from GPL edition) John McCabe @ 2008-03-20 16:46 ` John McCabe 2008-03-20 22:08 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-04-29 9:34 ` John McCabe 1 sibling, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-20 16:46 UTC (permalink / raw) On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:35:04 +0000, John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> wrote: >I've just installed the GPL version of GNAT, with Gnatbench 2.0.1 into >Eclipse. I created a new Ada project, a "Hello World" one, and set the >toolchain to gnatmake. When I try to build it I get: > >"Could not execute command 'make >GPRPATH="C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj\AdaStartProj.gpr" build" > >Does anyone know why that is? > >Why is it not trying to run gnatmake directly? Ok - I've discovered this myself; because it creates a Makefile that gnatmake is run from! What I've discovered is that, if I go in to the folder where my project is stored and then run the make command, it works. This suggests to me that the gnatbench builder in my case isn't running in the working folder. Is there something I need to do to sort that out? I can't see any way to configure the gnatbench builder? Thanks for any help John >Does it make a difference that I'm using Eclipse Europa (3.3.1.1) and >CDT 4.0.2? > >Thanks >John ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-20 16:46 ` John McCabe @ 2008-03-20 22:08 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-25 18:06 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-20 22:08 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mar 20, 11:46 am, John McCabe <j...@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > >Does it make a difference that I'm using Eclipse Europa (3.3.1.1) and > >CDT 4.0.2? > Those are the required Eclipse & CDT versions I use at work with the newer GNATbench 2.1.0. However when I was using GNATbench 2.0.1, I had Eclipse 3.2.2 and CDT 3.1.2. That combination worked for me. - Britt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-20 22:08 ` Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-25 18:06 ` John McCabe 2008-03-25 20:32 ` Britt Snodgrass 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-25 18:06 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi Britt, On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:08:16 -0700 (PDT), Britt Snodgrass <britt.snodgrass@gmail.com> wrote: >On Mar 20, 11:46�am, John McCabe <j...@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> >wrote: > >> >> >Does it make a difference that I'm using Eclipse Europa (3.3.1.1) and >> >CDT 4.0.2? >> > >Those are the required Eclipse & CDT versions I use at work with the >newer GNATbench 2.1.0. However when I was using GNATbench 2.0.1, I >had Eclipse 3.2.2 and CDT 3.1.2. That combination worked for me. Well I hadn't intended to do this, but :-) I've just downloaded a clean set of Eclipse 3.2.2 and CDT 3.1.2 and installed them, followed by GnatBench 2.0.1. I get exactly the same error. Do you know if there is a specific version of make required? When I run make --version I get... "GNU Make 3.81 Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. This program built for i386-pc-mingw32" As I said, if I go in to the workspace and manually enter the command it is fine, but try to do it from anywhere except where the project file (well, makefile!) is located and it doesn't work (makes sense, but I assumed that Gnatbench should sort out going to the right place!). Any help gratefully appreciated. John ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-25 18:06 ` John McCabe @ 2008-03-25 20:32 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-25 21:17 ` John McCabe 2008-03-26 10:19 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 2 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-25 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw) John, I use GNU Make 3.79.1 build for mingw32: >make --version GNU Make version 3.79.1, by Richard Stallman and Roland McGrath. Built for mingw32 Copyright (C) 1988, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 2000 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. I assume you have make.exe somewhere in your system search path before starting Eclipse, in addition to the GNAT bin directory. Take a look inside your .project and .gb_project files to see if they look right and make sure that the .gb_project file contains the right relative path to the .gpr file. - Britt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-25 20:32 ` Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-25 21:17 ` John McCabe 2008-03-26 21:07 ` Simon Wright 2008-03-26 10:19 ` John McCabe 1 sibling, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-25 21:17 UTC (permalink / raw) Britt Snodgrass <britt.snodgrass@gmail.com> wrote: Britt >I use GNU Make 3.79.1 build for mingw32: > >>make --version >GNU Make version 3.79.1, by Richard Stallman and Roland McGrath. >Built for mingw32 >Copyright (C) 1988, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 2000 > Free Software Foundation, Inc. >This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. >There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A >PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Thanks for that. >I assume you have make.exe somewhere in your system search path before >starting Eclipse, in addition to the GNAT bin directory. Take a look >inside your .project and .gb_project files to see if they look right >and make sure that the .gb_project file contains the right relative >path to the .gpr file. I'll check that tomorrow when I'm back at work but, as I said earlier, the command that fails is: make GPRPATH="C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj\AdaStartProj.gpr" build The path to the GPR file is entirely correct, the problem is that the Makefile is also in that folder but, without running make from that folder, it's not going to build and, for some reason, my installation of Eclipse/CDT/Gnatbench doesn't seem to enter the right folder before executing make! That exact command, when run manually from my command line, works perfectly. I noticed in one of the .xxx files that it identifies information on the GNAT builder. There is an XML field for options to send to the builder, I don't suppose there could be something in there that would help? Thanks again. John ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-25 21:17 ` John McCabe @ 2008-03-26 21:07 ` Simon Wright 2008-03-26 22:05 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Simon Wright @ 2008-03-26 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw) John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk.nospam> writes: > I'll check that tomorrow when I'm back at work but, as I said > earlier, the command that fails is: > > make GPRPATH="C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj\AdaStartProj.gpr" build > > The path to the GPR file is entirely correct, the problem is that > the Makefile is also in that folder but, without running make from > that folder, it's not going to build and, for some reason, my > installation of Eclipse/CDT/Gnatbench doesn't seem to enter the > right folder before executing make! > > That exact command, when run manually from my command line, works > perfectly. I noticed in one of the .xxx files that it identifies > information on the GNAT builder. There is an XML field for options > to send to the builder, I don't suppose there could be something in > there that would help? If you were executing this by hand from somw other directory, you could give make the -C option (change to named directory before running): make \ -C "C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj" \ GPRPATH="C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj\AdaStartProj.gpr" \ build Don't know if that will help ... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-26 21:07 ` Simon Wright @ 2008-03-26 22:05 ` John McCabe 2008-03-27 9:07 ` Stephen Leake 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-26 22:05 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi Simon Simon Wright <simon.j.wright@mac.com> wrote: >> That exact command, when run manually from my command line, works >> perfectly. I noticed in one of the .xxx files that it identifies >> information on the GNAT builder. There is an XML field for options >> to send to the builder, I don't suppose there could be something in >> there that would help? >If you were executing this by hand from somw other directory, you >could give make the -C option (change to named directory before >running): > make \ > -C "C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj" \ > GPRPATH="C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj\AdaStartProj.gpr" \ > build >Don't know if that will help ... Thanks for that. That's interesting to know but, as I don't know how to (and can't see any way, at least documented way to) customise how Gnatbench's builder operates, I don't know how useful that is. Surely there are other people out there who've used this free version? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-26 22:05 ` John McCabe @ 2008-03-27 9:07 ` Stephen Leake 2008-03-27 10:08 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Stephen Leake @ 2008-03-27 9:07 UTC (permalink / raw) John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk.nospam> writes: > Hi Simon > > Simon Wright <simon.j.wright@mac.com> wrote: > >>> That exact command, when run manually from my command line, works >>> perfectly. I noticed in one of the .xxx files that it identifies >>> information on the GNAT builder. There is an XML field for options >>> to send to the builder, I don't suppose there could be something in >>> there that would help? > >>If you were executing this by hand from somw other directory, you >>could give make the -C option (change to named directory before >>running): > >> make \ >> -C "C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj" \ >> GPRPATH="C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj\AdaStartProj.gpr" \ >> build > >>Don't know if that will help ... > > Thanks for that. That's interesting to know but, as I don't know how > to (and can't see any way, at least documented way to) customise how > Gnatbench's builder operates, I don't know how useful that is. > > Surely there are other people out there who've used this free version? I've been tempted to switch to Eclipse from Emacs, mostly because Java is better for writing structured code than Lisp; I'm getting tired of fighting obscure Lisp code in Emacs. (Yes, I know that means I should go all the way and switch to GPS. But Eclipse has far more capability than GPS; it's much closer to Emacs). This discussion makes me want to wait Just a Little Longer :). -- -- Stephe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-27 9:07 ` Stephen Leake @ 2008-03-27 10:08 ` John McCabe 2008-03-29 0:28 ` Stephen Leake 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-27 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw) On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:07:30 -0400, Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: >John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk.nospam> writes: > >I've been tempted to switch to Eclipse from Emacs, mostly because Java >is better for writing structured code than Lisp; I'm getting tired of >fighting obscure Lisp code in Emacs. Oh no - surely not!!! Don't do it Stephe, who'll look after ada-mode :-) >(Yes, I know that means I should go all the way and switch to GPS. But >Eclipse has far more capability than GPS; it's much closer to Emacs). Personally I'd avoid GPS. I've only had a little play with it, but two things about GPS would put me off... 1) It's phenomenally ugly, at least on Windows where the GTK widgets it uses just don't (in my opinion) look right. Perhaps GPS Pro is better? 2) Who uses it outside the Ada world? Can you get full support for Python, Perl, PHP, Ant, Java plug-ins for it, what about ? Are you ever likely to? 3) As AdaCore have developed Gnatbench (although I can't get it to work sensibly :-) you have to wonder whether this could be the beginning of the end for GPS. In addition the ADT (Hibachi) development is also supported by AdaCore along with a multitude of other Ada vendors. http://www.eclipse.org/org/press-release/20071105_hibachi.php 4) It's got a silly acronym/abbreviation, it's too much like GPS (Global Positioning System)! (well, 4 things I guess :-) Eclipse not only looks better, as they've used the SWT widgets, it's more widely supported. GPS clearly has many useful features, but there doesn't seem to be much (that I know of) that couldn't be implemented in Eclipse. With all due respect to AdaCore, I do wonder why they ever bothered to create GPS - surely IDEs aren't their core business? The one big advantage over Eclipse is start-up time though, but when you're developing software professionally (in my experience) you often just have the IDE open permanently anyway! >This discussion makes me want to wait Just a Little Longer :). I have to say that Gnatbench looks promising, it's about time there was an industrial strength Ada IDE for Eclipse, but I just can't understand why I have this significant issue with it. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-27 10:08 ` John McCabe @ 2008-03-29 0:28 ` Stephen Leake 2008-03-29 2:48 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-29 23:10 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 2 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Stephen Leake @ 2008-03-29 0:28 UTC (permalink / raw) John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> writes: > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:07:30 -0400, Stephen Leake > <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: > >>John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk.nospam> writes: >> >>I've been tempted to switch to Eclipse from Emacs, mostly because Java >>is better for writing structured code than Lisp; I'm getting tired of >>fighting obscure Lisp code in Emacs. > > Oh no - surely not!!! Don't do it Stephe, who'll look after ada-mode > :-) It will just wither away and die. I think Emacs is headed in that direction anyway. >>(Yes, I know that means I should go all the way and switch to GPS. But >>Eclipse has far more capability than GPS; it's much closer to Emacs). > > Personally I'd avoid GPS. I've only had a little play with it, but two > things about GPS would put me off... > > 1) It's phenomenally ugly, at least on Windows where the GTK widgets > it uses just don't (in my opinion) look right. Perhaps GPS Pro is > better? I guess you haven't seen Emacs on Win32? Not "pretty" by any standards. But I just ignore that - I'm looking for function over form. > 2) Who uses it outside the Ada world? Can you get full support for > Python, Perl, PHP, Ant, Java plug-ins for it, what about ? Are you > ever likely to? Right. That's why I'm considering Eclipse. > 4) It's got a silly acronym/abbreviation, it's too much like GPS > (Global Positioning System)! That was discussed when it was first announced. It seems AdaCore thought the conflation might actually be a good thing, since it would generate attention. Since people conflate Ada and ADA and all the other ADA's all the time, what's a little more? > With all due respect to AdaCore, I do wonder why they ever bothered to > create GPS - surely IDEs aren't their core business? They were looking to expand. And many people seem to expect a compiler to come with a dedicated IDE. I suspect that's partly so they don't have to figure out how to tell some other IDE to run the compiler. -- -- Stephe ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-29 0:28 ` Stephen Leake @ 2008-03-29 2:48 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-29 23:32 ` John McCabe 2008-03-29 23:10 ` John McCabe 1 sibling, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-29 2:48 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mar 28, 7:28 pm, Stephen Leake <Stephe.Le...@nasa.gov> wrote: > John McCabe <j...@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> writes: > > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 05:07:30 -0400, Stephen Leake > > <Stephe.Le...@nasa.gov> wrote: > > >>John McCabe <j...@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk.nospam> writes: > > >>I've been tempted to switch to Eclipse from Emacs, mostly because Java > >>is better for writing structured code than Lisp; I'm getting tired of > >>fighting obscure Lisp code in Emacs. > > > Oh no - surely not!!! Don't do it Stephe, who'll look after ada-mode > > :-) > > It will just wither away and die. I think Emacs is headed in that > direction anyway. > > >>(Yes, I know that means I should go all the way and switch to GPS. But > >>Eclipse has far more capability than GPS; it's much closer to Emacs). > > > Personally I'd avoid GPS. I've only had a little play with it, but two > > things about GPS would put me off... > > > 1) It's phenomenally ugly, at least on Windows where the GTK widgets > > it uses just don't (in my opinion) look right. Perhaps GPS Pro is > > better? > > I guess you haven't seen Emacs on Win32? Not "pretty" by any > standards. But I just ignore that - I'm looking for function over form. I agree with function over form. GPS has some display quirks but I don't think it looks too bad. I use it with Consolas as my editor font. GPS is optimized for use wth GNAT and GNAT projects (.gpr files). That optimization is a good thing. > > > 2) Who uses it outside the Ada world? Can you get full support for > > Python, Perl, PHP, Ant, Java plug-ins for it, what about ? Are you > > ever likely to? > > Right. That's why I'm considering Eclipse. GNATbench development is progressing nicely. I've been using GNATbench 2.1.0 since its release to supported customers. I'm happy with it and confident that AdaCore will continue to improve it. I like the fact that I can switch between GPS and GNATbench without touching my .gpr files. As a development environment, Eclipse certainly looks nice and is very extensible, but its comparatively complex, heavyweight and sluggish compared to other options. That's why I also use GPS, Nedit, or TextPad depending on what I'm doing. > > > 4) It's got a silly acronym/abbreviation, it's too much like GPS > > (Global Positioning System)! > > That was discussed when it was first announced. It seems AdaCore > thought the conflation might actually be a good thing, since it would > generate attention. Some people I know use GPS to develop GPS :) > > Since people conflate Ada and ADA and all the other ADA's all the > time, what's a little more? > > > With all due respect to AdaCore, I do wonder why they ever bothered to > > create GPS - surely IDEs aren't their core business? > > They were looking to expand. And many people seem to expect a compiler > to come with a dedicated IDE. I suspect that's partly so they don't > have to figure out how to tell some other IDE to run the compiler. I agree. GPS is also a showcase of what can be accomplished with GtkAda. Before GPS they had GLIDE. GLIDE was great if you like Emacs but many people don't. - Britt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-29 2:48 ` Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-29 23:32 ` John McCabe 2008-03-30 8:24 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-29 23:32 UTC (permalink / raw) Britt Snodgrass <britt.snodgrass@gmail.com> wrote: >> > 1) It's phenomenally ugly, at least on Windows where the GTK widgets >> > it uses just don't (in my opinion) look right. Perhaps GPS Pro is >> > better? >> >> I guess you haven't seen Emacs on Win32? Not "pretty" by any >> standards. But I just ignore that - I'm looking for function over form. > >I agree with function over form. GPS has some display quirks but I >don't think it looks too bad. I guess it's all a matter of opinion but, to me, on MS Windows (which is what I am currently expected to develop on - albeit in C++ and not, unfortunately, in Ada) GPS looks awful, like something out of the '80s. >GPS is optimized for use wth GNAT and GNAT projects (.gpr >files). That optimization is a good thing. Of course it is a good thing, but.... >> >> > 2) Who uses it outside the Ada world? Can you get full support for >> > Python, Perl, PHP, Ant, Java plug-ins for it, what about ? Are you >> > ever likely to? >> Right. That's why I'm considering Eclipse. >GNATbench development is progressing nicely. I've been using >GNATbench 2.1.0 since its release to supported customers. I'm happy >with it and confident that AdaCore will continue to improve it. I'm intrigued about what will happen with Hibachi and GNATBench. It is good that AdaCore are contributing to Hibachi (well, I assume it is, not having got GNATBench 2.0.1 to work properly yet myself :-) I can only assume that GNATBench in the future will use core Hibachi code then AdaCore can concentrate on the value added GNAT optimised bits and pieces. >I >like the fact that I can switch between GPS and GNATbench without >touching my .gpr files. That is very beneficial, if you've used GPS. >As a development environment, Eclipse >certainly looks nice and is very extensible, but its comparatively >complex, heavyweight and sluggish compared to other options. That's >why I also use GPS, Nedit, or TextPad depending on what I'm doing. I'm in the unfortunate position that a lot of the early development of the code we have at work was done in MS Visual Studio .NET and we've developed tools around VS Project files, hence we continue to use VS.NET. For some reason I have major issues with it - it's very slow and hangs a lot. Eclipse is slow to start, but once it's going I've had no real problems. Saying that, I use Emacs on a daily basis just because it's more powerful for what I want. >> > 4) It's got a silly acronym/abbreviation, it's too much like GPS >> > (Global Positioning System)! >> >> That was discussed when it was first announced. It seems AdaCore >> thought the conflation might actually be a good thing, since it would >> generate attention. >Some people I know use GPS to develop GPS :) Yes - that helps ! :-} >> > With all due respect to AdaCore, I do wonder why they ever bothered to >> > create GPS - surely IDEs aren't their core business? >> >> They were looking to expand. And many people seem to expect a compiler >> to come with a dedicated IDE. I suspect that's partly so they don't >> have to figure out how to tell some other IDE to run the compiler. > >I agree. GPS is also a showcase of what can be accomplished with >GtkAda. Before GPS they had GLIDE. GLIDE was great if you like Emacs >but many people don't. GPS may be a showcase for GTKAda but, on Windows, I don't think it does GTK+ any favours. Look at the screenshot at https://libre.adacore.com/gps/img/gps_800x600.jpg Does that, to you, match up with the phrase "Same modern GUI available on all platforms " you can find at https://libre.adacore.com/gps/main.html? To me the answer is plainly no - that's the sort of GUI you'd be unlucky to get on Windows 3.1! Anyway - I don't develop in Ada any more (unfortunately - with caveats!) so it's not really my place to criticise the development environments that are available but, it's so difficult for me not to! Primarily it's through frustration - I like Eclipse and it's frustrating that it has taken so long for the Ada world to get something out to allow Eclipse to be used as an industrial strenght Ada IDE! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-29 23:32 ` John McCabe @ 2008-03-30 8:24 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2008-03-31 14:23 ` John McCabe 2008-04-01 0:09 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-01 17:06 ` Pascal Obry 2 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2008-03-30 8:24 UTC (permalink / raw) On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 23:32:50 +0000, John McCabe wrote: > GPS may be a showcase for GTKAda but, on Windows, I don't think it > does GTK+ any favours. Look at the screenshot at > > https://libre.adacore.com/gps/img/gps_800x600.jpg > > Does that, to you, match up with the phrase "Same modern GUI > available on all platforms " you can find at > https://libre.adacore.com/gps/main.html? To me the answer is plainly > no - that's the sort of GUI you'd be unlucky to get on Windows 3.1! Hmm, I don't see that. Do you mean ugly window decoration elements and cheap icons? Because otherwise GPS just follows MS Visual Studio design. The decorations can be changed using a GTK+ RC file. I wonder why AdaCore didn't do that. But where AdaCore took time and didn't copy from MS, GPS looks pretty good. For example, graphical indication of error locations left of the editor window is a great idea. IMO the problems with GPS lie elsewhere. I mean poor design of GTK+ and GDB. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-30 8:24 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2008-03-31 14:23 ` John McCabe 2008-03-31 16:12 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-31 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw) On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:24:47 +0200, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote: >On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 23:32:50 +0000, John McCabe wrote: > >> GPS may be a showcase for GTKAda but, on Windows, I don't think it >> does GTK+ any favours. Look at the screenshot at >> >> https://libre.adacore.com/gps/img/gps_800x600.jpg >> >> Does that, to you, match up with the phrase "Same modern GUI >> available on all platforms " you can find at >> https://libre.adacore.com/gps/main.html? To me the answer is plainly >> no - that's the sort of GUI you'd be unlucky to get on Windows 3.1! > >Hmm, I don't see that. Do you mean ugly window decoration elements and >cheap icons? Well yes, but I'm not sure about "cheap" icons. Many of the icons are (I would say) better than what you would expect from MS tools, but they just don't really fit - the whole GTK+ thing is still, to me, not quite right on MS Windows. >Because otherwise GPS just follows MS Visual Studio design. The layout does follow the MS VS design, the look though is of a rather old version of MS VS, perhaps version 2.0 or 4.0 from the mid-90s. >The decorations can be changed using a GTK+ RC file. I wonder why AdaCore >didn't do that. >But where AdaCore took time and didn't copy from MS, GPS looks pretty good. >For example, graphical indication of error locations left of the editor >window is a great idea. Do you mean the bit where the space is used to provide a representation of the whole file, a rectangle moves up and down to show which part of the file you're currently viewing, and red blocks show where the error is? That's interesting, but have you seen how the errors and warnings are shown in Eclipse! >IMO the problems with GPS lie elsewhere. I mean poor design of GTK+ and >GDB. I'm sure GPS is a perfectly capable tool and is better than nothing (the whole concept of an IDE that can be used to manage your projects is quite an advancement from what went before). I don't have any real gripes with functionality, just form. It seems like AdaCore have put a fair amount of effort into something that is ever so slightly pointless! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-31 14:23 ` John McCabe @ 2008-03-31 16:12 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2008-03-31 16:43 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2008-03-31 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:23:24 +0100, John McCabe wrote: > the whole GTK+ thing is still, to me, not > quite right on MS Windows. Yes, but it is getting better. >>Because otherwise GPS just follows MS Visual Studio design. > > The layout does follow the MS VS design, the look though is of a > rather old version of MS VS, perhaps version 2.0 or 4.0 from the > mid-90s. Hmm, I know all of them, and I see no any sufficient difference to GPS. In fact the latest VS is definitely worse, ergonomically, I mean. It permanently forgets its layout. For instance it kicks off the tray with the current source column and line numbers. Then it takes hours to get it back, because the configuration GUI is just typical MS: deeply nested menus and tabbed dialogs distributed all over the GUI combining properties carefully selected by a random generator... XML project files is a horror. Automated compilation (we are heavily using it) never works as expected, etc. File search which once worked reasonably is ruined now. The only great thing MS still has, is the debugger. But I am sure, they are working on that! (:-)) >>The decorations can be changed using a GTK+ RC file. I wonder why AdaCore >>didn't do that. > >>But where AdaCore took time and didn't copy from MS, GPS looks pretty good. >>For example, graphical indication of error locations left of the editor >>window is a great idea. > > Do you mean the bit where the space is used to provide a > representation of the whole file, a rectangle moves up and down to > show which part of the file you're currently viewing, and red blocks > show where the error is? Yes > That's interesting, but have you seen how the errors and warnings are > shown in Eclipse! I didn't use Eclipse yet. I know that GPS if far better than VS in that respect. Though GNAT error messages are better than C++ ones, but they still are quite useless in many cases. Normally I just look at the source code lines. An improvement GPS could have is to highlight error slices (tokens) rather than lines, as well as in the debugger. I remember National Instruments IDE for CVI compiler which did that. >>IMO the problems with GPS lie elsewhere. I mean poor design of GTK+ and >>GDB. > > I'm sure GPS is a perfectly capable tool and is better than nothing > (the whole concept of an IDE that can be used to manage your projects > is quite an advancement from what went before). I don't have any real > gripes with functionality, just form. It seems like AdaCore have put a > fair amount of effort into something that is ever so slightly > pointless! They probably wanted to be independent on other vendors and unreliable C/Java mess. The only mistake they probably made was GTK+, which is still C and still a mess. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-31 16:12 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2008-03-31 16:43 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-31 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 18:12:55 +0200, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote: >On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:23:24 +0100, John McCabe wrote: > >> the whole GTK+ thing is still, to me, not >> quite right on MS Windows. > >Yes, but it is getting better. > >>>Because otherwise GPS just follows MS Visual Studio design. >> >> The layout does follow the MS VS design, the look though is of a >> rather old version of MS VS, perhaps version 2.0 or 4.0 from the >> mid-90s. > >Hmm, I know all of them, and I see no any sufficient difference to GPS. In >fact the latest VS is definitely worse, ergonomically, I mean. It >permanently forgets its layout. For instance it kicks off the tray with the >current source column and line numbers. Then it takes hours to get it back, >because the configuration GUI is just typical MS: deeply nested menus and >tabbed dialogs distributed all over the GUI combining properties carefully >selected by a random generator... XML project files is a horror. Automated >compilation (we are heavily using it) never works as expected, etc. File >search which once worked reasonably is ruined now. The only great thing MS >still has, is the debugger. But I am sure, they are working on that! (:-)) I have to agree that, in terms of function, the versions of VS I'm using now (.NET/2002) and previously (2005), are lacking compared to VS 6.0. In terms of how they look though, they have improved a bit over VS 6.0. >>>The decorations can be changed using a GTK+ RC file. I wonder why AdaCore >>>didn't do that. >> >>>But where AdaCore took time and didn't copy from MS, GPS looks pretty good. >>>For example, graphical indication of error locations left of the editor >>>window is a great idea. >> >> Do you mean the bit where the space is used to provide a >> representation of the whole file, a rectangle moves up and down to >> show which part of the file you're currently viewing, and red blocks >> show where the error is? > >Yes > >> That's interesting, but have you seen how the errors and warnings are >> shown in Eclipse! > >I didn't use Eclipse yet. I know that GPS if far better than VS in that >respect. Though GNAT error messages are better than C++ ones, but they >still are quite useless in many cases. Normally I just look at the source >code lines. An improvement GPS could have is to highlight error slices >(tokens) rather than lines, as well as in the debugger. I remember National >Instruments IDE for CVI compiler which did that. Take a look at Eclipse. I presume you know Java well enough to have a play with it. The error stuff is pretty good with Java. >>>IMO the problems with GPS lie elsewhere. I mean poor design of GTK+ and >>>GDB. >> >> I'm sure GPS is a perfectly capable tool and is better than nothing >> (the whole concept of an IDE that can be used to manage your projects >> is quite an advancement from what went before). I don't have any real >> gripes with functionality, just form. It seems like AdaCore have put a >> fair amount of effort into something that is ever so slightly >> pointless! > >They probably wanted to be independent on other vendors and unreliable >C/Java mess. The only mistake they probably made was GTK+, which is still C >and still a mess. LOL!! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-29 23:32 ` John McCabe 2008-03-30 8:24 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2008-04-01 0:09 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-01 4:19 ` Eric Hughes ` (3 more replies) 2008-04-01 17:06 ` Pascal Obry 2 siblings, 4 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-01 0:09 UTC (permalink / raw) "John McCabe" <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk.nospam> wrote in message news:8ijtu314uf1j34hc837qkgtgd4lqbr0q5l@4ax.com... ... > GPS may be a showcase for GTKAda but, on Windows, I don't think it > does GTK+ any favours. Look at the screenshot at > > https://libre.adacore.com/gps/img/gps_800x600.jpg > > Does that, to you, match up with the phrase "Same modern GUI > available on all platforms " you can find at > https://libre.adacore.com/gps/main.html? To me the answer is plainly > no - that's the sort of GUI you'd be unlucky to get on Windows 3.1! It surely doesn't look like a Windows 3.1 application, more like Windows 95, which surely has nothing to do with the 1980s. If you think this is ugly, you should see the GUI distributed with Janus/Ada...it *is* a Windows 3.1 look, and it is nowhere is nice as this. :-) And IMHO, Windows 95/98/2000 is still the most professionally looking interface. The silly eye candy of XP and Vista just waste a lot of time and effort. The only complaint I'd have looking at the screenshot is the funny GTK look. Surely that isn't worth caring about... > Anyway - I don't develop in Ada any more (unfortunately - with > caveats!) so it's not really my place to criticise the development > environments that are available but, it's so difficult for me not to! > Primarily it's through frustration - I like Eclipse and it's > frustrating that it has taken so long for the Ada world to get > something out to allow Eclipse to be used as an industrial strenght > Ada IDE! My understanding is that to write Eclipse plugins you have to write in Java. If I wanted to use Java, I wouldn't be here in the first place. If you can't program it in Ada, it isn't worth writing. I understand the market pressures, but on a practical basis, I don't understand the big deal about bloated IDEs anyway. Everything that is worthwhile in an IDE is language and compiler-specific anyway (debuggers, error messages, syntax, symbol browsing, project management), so what can this empty framework actually accomplish? It seems like just another way to keep Intel and AMD in business by forcing machine upgrades that aren't necessary. Randy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-01 0:09 ` Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-01 4:19 ` Eric Hughes 2008-04-01 7:39 ` Georg Bauhaus ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Eric Hughes @ 2008-04-01 4:19 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mar 31, 6:09 pm, "Randy Brukardt" <ra...@rrsoftware.com> wrote: > If I wanted to use Java, I wouldn't be here in the first place. If you can't > program it in Ada, it isn't worth writing. Lucky you. > I understand the market pressures, but on a practical basis, I don't > understand the big deal about bloated IDEs anyway. Everything that is > worthwhile in an IDE is language and compiler-specific anyway [...] My commercial work is mostly in C++ and Java. The benefit I take from Eclipse is exactly that I don't have to remember arbitrary details of one-IDE-per-environment. Eric ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-01 0:09 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-01 4:19 ` Eric Hughes @ 2008-04-01 7:39 ` Georg Bauhaus 2008-04-01 19:52 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-01 19:58 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-02 21:03 ` John McCabe 2008-04-03 10:14 ` Steffen Huber 3 siblings, 2 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Georg Bauhaus @ 2008-04-01 7:39 UTC (permalink / raw) Randy Brukardt wrote: > My understanding is that to write Eclipse plugins you have to write > in Java. You could try Ada, too, because there are two Ada compilers emitting Java byte code (fairly well). Compilers for some other languages do this, too. Sun is spending money on getting Scala and Ruby running on the JVM. All languages are integrated with the Java class library then. > I understand the market pressures, but on a practical basis, I don't > understand the big deal about bloated IDEs anyway. Everything that is > worthwhile in an IDE is language and compiler-specific anyway (debuggers, > error messages, syntax, symbol browsing, project management), Itegration (like in document centric working) just in case the only integration you practically get on Windows is integratation of the Microsoft operating system with other Microsofts offerings. (Yesterday I heard that in Norway, an ISO country vote of 5 "For", 19 "Against" counts as a "For". This vote was about the planned ISO standardized office documents file formats. Microsoft keeps advertising theirs as "Office Open XML" (in this word order) ...) > so what can > this empty framework actually accomplish? In a sense, the same thing that Ada was meant to accomplish? So that there aren't so many IDEs. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-01 7:39 ` Georg Bauhaus @ 2008-04-01 19:52 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-01 19:58 ` Randy Brukardt 1 sibling, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-01 19:52 UTC (permalink / raw) "Georg Bauhaus" <rm.tsoh.plus-bug.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de> wrote in message news:47f1e695$0$4762$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net... > Randy Brukardt wrote: ... > > so what can > > this empty framework actually accomplish? > > In a sense, the same thing that Ada was meant to accomplish? > So that there aren't so many IDEs. You only need the one from your Ada compiler vendor. There's little point in programming in anything else. I realize you might need to interface to existing code in another language, but you don't need to *write* any code in another language. I suppose that people that can't stop themselves from developing in a dozen languages might find some benefit to something like Eclipse. You can also point a loaded gun at your head and pull the trigger a few times. It doesn't make it a good idea. :-) It's hard enough to be proficient at one language. (Needless to say, I don't think Eclipse support for Janus/Ada is going to be a high priority.) Randy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-01 7:39 ` Georg Bauhaus 2008-04-01 19:52 ` Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-01 19:58 ` Randy Brukardt 1 sibling, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-01 19:58 UTC (permalink / raw) "Georg Bauhaus" <rm.tsoh.plus-bug.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de> wrote in message news:47f1e695$0$4762$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net... > Randy Brukardt wrote: > > > My understanding is that to write Eclipse plugins you have to write > > in Java. > > You could try Ada, too, because there are two Ada compilers emitting > Java byte code (fairly well). They're not supported anymore, which is an obvious problem. Besides, "Ada" to me means "Janus/Ada" -- why should I subject myself to someone else's bugs? (Or pay for the privilege, for that matter.) Randy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-01 0:09 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-01 4:19 ` Eric Hughes 2008-04-01 7:39 ` Georg Bauhaus @ 2008-04-02 21:03 ` John McCabe 2008-04-03 3:20 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-03 10:14 ` Steffen Huber 3 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-04-02 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw) "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote: >> GPS may be a showcase for GTKAda but, on Windows, I don't think it >> does GTK+ any favours. Look at the screenshot at >> >> https://libre.adacore.com/gps/img/gps_800x600.jpg >> >> Does that, to you, match up with the phrase "Same modern GUI >> available on all platforms " you can find at >> https://libre.adacore.com/gps/main.html? To me the answer is plainly >> no - that's the sort of GUI you'd be unlucky to get on Windows 3.1! >It surely doesn't look like a Windows 3.1 application, more like Windows 95, >which surely has nothing to do with the 1980s. Well, I was overexaggerating a little :-) >If you think this is ugly, >you should see the GUI distributed with Janus/Ada...it *is* a Windows 3.1 >look, and it is nowhere is nice as this. :-) That would be interesting to see, but there aren't any screenshots on your website, and the main Janus/Ada 95 page hasn't been updated since 2001 according to the bit at the bottom. >And IMHO, Windows 95/98/2000 is still the most professionally looking >interface. The silly eye candy of XP and Vista just waste a lot of time and >effort. I haven't really played much with Vista, but the GUI does seem a bit excessive to me. >The only complaint I'd have looking at the screenshot is the funny GTK look. >Surely that isn't worth caring about... I'm a bit pedantic about that; windows has a certain look and feel that I don't think GTK fits with (Eclipse is much better, probably because of the way the SWT works!). On the other hand I don't think apps with a Microsoft Windows Style look right on the Gnome desktop. >> Anyway - I don't develop in Ada any more (unfortunately - with >> caveats!) so it's not really my place to criticise the development >> environments that are available but, it's so difficult for me not to! >> Primarily it's through frustration - I like Eclipse and it's >> frustrating that it has taken so long for the Ada world to get >> something out to allow Eclipse to be used as an industrial strenght >> Ada IDE! > >My understanding is that to write Eclipse plugins you have to write in Java. >If I wanted to use Java, I wouldn't be here in the first place. If you can't >program it in Ada, it isn't worth writing. Things would be much better if there was an Ada OS. Unfortunately, while you can use foreign language libraries in Ada, you still basically have to understand those languages and, sometimes, write in them. To that extent, as others have responded to your next question, having a single IDE for various languages (like Eclipse) isa boon to productivity. The editors all work the same way, the vendor dependent details of debugging are hidden to some extent, and essentially the way you code, compile and debug is the same irrespective of what language you're using. >I understand the market pressures, but on a practical basis, I don't >understand the big deal about bloated IDEs anyway. Everything that is >worthwhile in an IDE is language and compiler-specific anyway (debuggers, >error messages, syntax, symbol browsing, project management), so what can >this empty framework actually accomplish? Essentially it's a template, at least the Java development environment is. It provides a means for companies to produce a fully integrated IDE without having to go through the rigmarole of producing it from scratch. Much of the foundation is already there, you just have to provide your specific bit and plug them. To some extent the way all the components fit together is fixed so, to the user, programming in one language is much like programming in any other. You have, however, ways in which you can provide very compiler specific information if you like, by producing views to display it. I think it's brilliant personally. My productivity would be improved if I were able to use purely Eclipse (I am working in a multi-language environment) because I would only need to learn to use one IDE. >It seems like just another way to >keep Intel and AMD in business by forcing machine upgrades that aren't >necessary. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-02 21:03 ` John McCabe @ 2008-04-03 3:20 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-03 7:35 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2008-04-03 10:20 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 2 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-03 3:20 UTC (permalink / raw) "John McCabe" <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk.nospam> wrote in message news:str7v39teoa2rielnfrivc290751v3g8uu@4ax.com... > "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote: ... > >If you think this is ugly, > >you should see the GUI distributed with Janus/Ada...it *is* a Windows 3.1 > >look, and it is nowhere is nice as this. :-) > > That would be interesting to see, but there aren't any screenshots on > your website, and the main Janus/Ada 95 page hasn't been updated since > 2001 according to the bit at the bottom. Umm, our website is intended to convince people to buy Janus/Ada, not to convince them not to. ;-) The whole site is going to get an overhaul after the next release of Janus/Ada comes out, but there isn't much point in updating it to show off non-existent tools... ... > >My understanding is that to write Eclipse plugins you have to write in Java. > >If I wanted to use Java, I wouldn't be here in the first place. If you can't > >program it in Ada, it isn't worth writing. > > Things would be much better if there was an Ada OS. Unfortunately, > while you can use foreign language libraries in Ada, you still > basically have to understand those languages and, sometimes, write in > them. Hopefully, you *don't* have to do this more than once per project, and the majority of programmers don't have to do it. ... > >I understand the market pressures, but on a practical basis, I don't > >understand the big deal about bloated IDEs anyway. Everything that is > >worthwhile in an IDE is language and compiler-specific anyway (debuggers, > >error messages, syntax, symbol browsing, project management), so what can > >this empty framework actually accomplish? > > Essentially it's a template, at least the Java development environment > is. It provides a means for companies to produce a fully integrated > IDE without having to go through the rigmarole of producing it from > scratch. Much of the foundation is already there, you just have to > provide your specific bit and plug them. What rigmarole? With a decent windowing toolkit (or even with Claw ;-), there isn't much to putting together a decent editing app. And the rest of it is going to be very language- and implementation-specific. My understanding is that that pretty much the entire Eclipse IDE resides in its plugins, so developing them is just as complex as developing a whole IDE. Moreover, you have to develop them in a subpar programming language (IMHO - and in any event I don't know it anywhere near as well as I know Ada). So what's the gain? It mainly seems to be a marketing checkbox to me. > To some extent the way all > the components fit together is fixed so, to the user, programming in > one language is much like programming in any other. You have, however, > ways in which you can provide very compiler specific information if > you like, by producing views to display it. I think it's brilliant > personally. My productivity would be improved if I were able to use > purely Eclipse (I am working in a multi-language environment) because > I would only need to learn to use one IDE. Fine enough. But I'm really not very interested in multi-language programming. Lest I appear to be losing my mind, let me explain a bit. My experience is that a large proportion of bugs are in the interface between Ada code and other language code. Moreover, those bugs cannot be diagnosed by the compiler or its runtime system, so there is no real hope of help. My hope is that Ada and Ada compilers will continue to get smarter about detecting errors (it seems likely, and surely they are going to get worse), and that is going to increase the difference in number of bugs in the interfaces compared to the rest of the application. In an ideal world, the entire application would be built in Ada, down to the metal (running on MS-DOS in the old days was pretty close to that!), and all of that checking could be applied to the entire app. (I do expect to see full program compilation in the fairly near future.) Now, I realize that it's unlikely that many of us are going to be able to build all-Ada bare machines. (The fact that people have turned to using real-time executives to provide the same services that Ada already does has always mystified me; a bare machine Ada should do as well or better than your typical RTOS.) But my preference is to spend some effort up front wrapping any foreign code into the best designed Ada interfaces that you can get, and then (hopefully) never look at it again. That was the main driving reason for developing Claw, and that has worked out pretty well (could have been better, I suppose, but that's always true). Anyway, I *hope* I'm not crazy. I realize I could make more money by giving up on building decent programs and following the herd. But I hope that there still is some value to doing the right thing. (Based on yesterday's election results here in Wisconsin, it appears that there isn't. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned in that way.) Randy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-03 3:20 ` Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-03 7:35 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2008-04-03 10:20 ` John McCabe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2008-04-03 7:35 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 22:20:53 -0500, Randy Brukardt wrote: > Now, I realize that it's unlikely that many of us are going to be able to > build all-Ada bare machines. (The fact that people have turned to using > real-time executives to provide the same services that Ada already does has > always mystified me; a bare machine Ada should do as well or better than > your typical RTOS.) But my preference is to spend some effort up front > wrapping any foreign code into the best designed Ada interfaces that you can > get, and then (hopefully) never look at it again. That was the main driving > reason for developing Claw, and that has worked out pretty well (could have > been better, I suppose, but that's always true). Sorry Randy, but the source of this problem is all on your (vendor's) side. When it comes to a bare board support, there seems to be no chance to get a full Ada 95/2005 (including tasking) and a TCP/IP stack for it. I, speaking as a customer, have no slightest desire to use a third party OS, but I forced to. [Otherwise, you are absolutely right] -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-03 3:20 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-03 7:35 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2008-04-03 10:20 ` John McCabe 2008-04-04 2:20 ` Randy Brukardt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-04-03 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 22:20:53 -0500, "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote: >"John McCabe" <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk.nospam> wrote in message >news:str7v39teoa2rielnfrivc290751v3g8uu@4ax.com... >> "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote: >... >> >If you think this is ugly, >> >you should see the GUI distributed with Janus/Ada...it *is* a Windows 3.1 >> >look, and it is nowhere is nice as this. :-) >> >> That would be interesting to see, but there aren't any screenshots on >> your website, and the main Janus/Ada 95 page hasn't been updated since >> 2001 according to the bit at the bottom. > >Umm, our website is intended to convince people to buy Janus/Ada, not to >convince them not to. ;-) LOL :-), but won't people just think "oh - that hasn't been updated since 2001, they probably don't actually sell it any more!" >The whole site is going to get an overhaul after the next release of >Janus/Ada comes out, but there isn't much point in updating it to show off >non-existent tools... Very true. >> >I understand the market pressures, but on a practical basis, I don't >> >understand the big deal about bloated IDEs anyway. Everything that is >> >worthwhile in an IDE is language and compiler-specific anyway (debuggers, >> >error messages, syntax, symbol browsing, project management), so what can >> >this empty framework actually accomplish? >> >> Essentially it's a template, at least the Java development environment >> is. It provides a means for companies to produce a fully integrated >> IDE without having to go through the rigmarole of producing it from >> scratch. Much of the foundation is already there, you just have to >> provide your specific bit and plug them. >What rigmarole? With a decent windowing toolkit (or even with Claw ;-), >there isn't much to putting together a decent editing app. Well, yes, editing is pretty much a piece of cake these days, but it's fitting all the different, possibly disparate bits together that takes the efforts, and this is where the Eclipse framework simplifies things (at least, that's what I understand as I've not had the chance to actually use it to do that sort of thing - I'm just a user, not a developer). >And the rest of >it is going to be very language- and implementation-specific. My >understanding is that that pretty much the entire Eclipse IDE resides in its >plugins, so developing them is just as complex as developing a whole IDE. Well not quite as complex as once you understand the Rich Client Platform and the whole framework, and you have the Java Development Tools to set an example, I believe it's easier. You only have to concentrate on the bits that are important to your application. >Moreover, you have to develop them in a subpar programming language (IMHO - >and in any event I don't know it anywhere near as well as I know Ada). So >what's the gain? It mainly seems to be a marketing checkbox to me. I agree with the subpar language thing, but from a marketing point of view, if you want to get into a market that is currently Java based, or C++ on Unix then there is a good chance you will find they already use Eclipse. If you and a competitor both sell Ada compilers, but your competitor has plugged in to Eclipse and you haven't, given no other significant differences in functionality between your products, I would suggest your competitor has the upper hand. Just look at who's involved in the Hibachi project - Aonix are effectively leading it with DDC-I and AdaCore having significant input, and supposedly OC Systems and Green Hills are expected to contribute. >> To some extent the way all >> the components fit together is fixed so, to the user, programming in >> one language is much like programming in any other. You have, however, >> ways in which you can provide very compiler specific information if >> you like, by producing views to display it. I think it's brilliant >> personally. My productivity would be improved if I were able to use >> purely Eclipse (I am working in a multi-language environment) because >> I would only need to learn to use one IDE. > >Fine enough. But I'm really not very interested in multi-language >programming. Lest I appear to be losing my mind, let me explain a bit. <..snip..> You seem to be too much of an idealist to me. Yes, in an ideal world, the chances are that Ada is the most appropriate language for most software to be developed in, but the world is far from ideal. >Now, I realize that it's unlikely that many of us are going to be able to >build all-Ada bare machines. (The fact that people have turned to using >real-time executives to provide the same services that Ada already does has >always mystified me; a bare machine Ada should do as well or better than >your typical RTOS.) But my preference is to spend some effort up front >wrapping any foreign code into the best designed Ada interfaces that you can >get, and then (hopefully) never look at it again. That was the main driving >reason for developing Claw, and that has worked out pretty well (could have >been better, I suppose, but that's always true). While that's true to some extent, I don't believe the "never look at it again" part is feasible - things move on underneath you. E.g. the Win32 stuff that I believe Claw wraps has moved on a bit since I first heard of Claw, which means you need to follow those developments and update your wrappers, or risk being obsolete. Basically any code that you wrap could change at any time to make your wrappers, if you don't follow those changes, just not work. This is especially true for wrappers to open-source software in my experience. >Anyway, I *hope* I'm not crazy. I realize I could make more money by giving >up on building decent programs and following the herd. But I hope that there >still is some value to doing the right thing. (Based on yesterday's election >results here in Wisconsin, it appears that there isn't. Maybe I'm just >old-fashioned in that way.) You're not crazy, just too much of an idealist (meant in a nice way :-) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-03 10:20 ` John McCabe @ 2008-04-04 2:20 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-04 22:50 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-04 2:20 UTC (permalink / raw) "John McCabe" <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:4pa9v3lbp3i24ob3kodj0f49laco0vo68j@4ax.com... > On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 22:20:53 -0500, "Randy Brukardt" ... > >And the rest of > >it is going to be very language- and implementation-specific. My > >understanding is that that pretty much the entire Eclipse IDE resides in its > >plugins, so developing them is just as complex as developing a whole IDE. > > Well not quite as complex as once you understand the Rich Client > Platform and the whole framework, and you have the Java Development > Tools to set an example, I believe it's easier. You only have to > concentrate on the bits that are important to your application. <sarcasm>Let's see. Learn two new toolkits and a new programming language. That's *sure* to be easy. </sarcasm> > >Moreover, you have to develop them in a subpar programming language (IMHO - > >and in any event I don't know it anywhere near as well as I know Ada). So > >what's the gain? It mainly seems to be a marketing checkbox to me. > > I agree with the subpar language thing, but from a marketing point of > view, if you want to get into a market that is currently Java based, > or C++ on Unix No. If you can stand the syntax of those languages, you're already in a different universe than me... > ... then there is a good chance you will find they already > use Eclipse. If you and a competitor both sell Ada compilers, but your > competitor has plugged in to Eclipse and you haven't, given no other > significant differences in functionality between your products, I > would suggest your competitor has the upper hand. Our competitors *always* have the upper hand; functionality seems to be irrelevant. We only get those people who are truly concerned about price *and* performance (and there are very few of those in the Ada community). And those who are looking for something that our competitor's don't have at all (Claw, MS-DOS compilers, etc.) > Just look at who's > involved in the Hibachi project - Aonix are effectively leading it > with DDC-I and AdaCore having significant input, and supposedly OC > Systems and Green Hills are expected to contribute. We would have contributed if there was something that we could actually do. Aonix is (partially) a Java company these days, so they (presumably) have the expertise to write such code. We don't. I'm sure the generic Ada stuff will work fine with us. But the compiler-specific stuff has no chance: all of our tools only have Ada interfaces (with a few exceptions for the command line). For instance, it would be impossible to interface our project manager to something that is not a native compiled language (it could be done from C, for example, but not from Java byte code or .Net for that matter). Launching command-line tools would only provide a small subset of the full functionality, and would be as slow as molasses. ... > >Now, I realize that it's unlikely that many of us are going to be able to > >build all-Ada bare machines. (The fact that people have turned to using > >real-time executives to provide the same services that Ada already does has > >always mystified me; a bare machine Ada should do as well or better than > >your typical RTOS.) But my preference is to spend some effort up front > >wrapping any foreign code into the best designed Ada interfaces that you can > >get, and then (hopefully) never look at it again. That was the main driving > >reason for developing Claw, and that has worked out pretty well (could have > >been better, I suppose, but that's always true). > > While that's true to some extent, I don't believe the "never look at > it again" part is feasible - things move on underneath you. E.g. the > Win32 stuff that I believe Claw wraps has moved on a bit since I first > heard of Claw, which means you need to follow those developments and > update your wrappers, or risk being obsolete. I like being obsolete. ;-) (I sure as heck am not wasting time on Vista!) Seriously, good interfaces don't change incompatibly. (Even iffy ones like Win32 don't change imcompatibly.) So existing code continues to work. If you need the new functionality, then of course you have to add it in, but that brings you back to the new development stage. Most of Win32 hasn't changed appreciably since Windows NT 4.0 came out. Mostly, there are totally new interfaces to support, very little change in the existing stuff. If you are using stuff that is not like that, you have my sympathy, but I also have to wonder if you wouldn't have been better off building it yourself (or finding it in Ada). Houses built on quicksand don't long stand. My personal rule is that if it isn't part of the OS, then I build it in Ada. And if I can't build it, I don't want it. That's probably too conservative, but I *always* get the tool I want that way, and there are few compromises needed. Yeah, I know ("too idealistic"). Randy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-04 2:20 ` Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-04 22:50 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-04-04 22:50 UTC (permalink / raw) "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote: >> Just look at who's >> involved in the Hibachi project - Aonix are effectively leading it >> with DDC-I and AdaCore having significant input, and supposedly OC >> Systems and Green Hills are expected to contribute. > >We would have contributed if there was something that we could actually do. >Aonix is (partially) a Java company these days, so they (presumably) have >the expertise to write such code. We don't. I'm sure the generic Ada stuff >will work fine with us. But the compiler-specific stuff has no chance: all >of our tools only have Ada interfaces (with a few exceptions for the command >line). For instance, it would be impossible to interface our project manager >to something that is not a native compiled language (it could be done from >C, for example, but not from Java byte code or .Net for that matter). Not even through JNI (the Java Native Interface)? >> While that's true to some extent, I don't believe the "never look at >> it again" part is feasible - things move on underneath you. E.g. the >> Win32 stuff that I believe Claw wraps has moved on a bit since I first >> heard of Claw, which means you need to follow those developments and >> update your wrappers, or risk being obsolete. >I like being obsolete. ;-) (I sure as heck am not wasting time on Vista!) >Seriously, good interfaces don't change incompatibly. (Even iffy ones like >Win32 don't change imcompatibly.) So existing code continues to work. If you >need the new functionality, then of course you have to add it in, but that >brings you back to the new development stage. Most of Win32 hasn't changed >appreciably since Windows NT 4.0 came out. Mostly, there are totally new >interfaces to support, very little change in the existing stuff. That's a fair point. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-04-01 0:09 ` Randy Brukardt ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2008-04-02 21:03 ` John McCabe @ 2008-04-03 10:14 ` Steffen Huber 3 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Steffen Huber @ 2008-04-03 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw) Randy Brukardt wrote: [Eclipse as an IDE] > I understand the market pressures, but on a practical basis, I don't > understand the big deal about bloated IDEs anyway. Everything that is > worthwhile in an IDE is language and compiler-specific anyway (debuggers, > error messages, syntax, symbol browsing, project management), so what can > this empty framework actually accomplish? It seems like just another way to > keep Intel and AMD in business by forcing machine upgrades that aren't > necessary. I can think of rather a lot of things in an IDE that are basically "language agnostic". Beyond providing a lot of code reusage possibilities (e.g. for the editor and the whole windowing stuff - the docking containers in Eclipse are a good example of that), think about "generic editors" for resources used in many languages (e.g. xml and text files), the help system, integration of a versioning system, integration of an issues tracker system, diff tools... If you are used to a tight integration and powerful plugins in Eclipse, evaluating something like GPS just makes you feel sad about the many hours wasted for reinventing the wheel, and coming up with much worse a wheel. Steffen -- Steffen Huber hubersn Software - http://www.hubersn-software.com/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-29 23:32 ` John McCabe 2008-03-30 8:24 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2008-04-01 0:09 ` Randy Brukardt @ 2008-04-01 17:06 ` Pascal Obry 2 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Pascal Obry @ 2008-04-01 17:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: John McCabe John, > GPS may be a showcase for GTKAda but, on Windows, I don't think it > does GTK+ any favours. Look at the screenshot at > > https://libre.adacore.com/gps/img/gps_800x600.jpg Well that's an old one. I have uploaded a recent look here: http://www.obry.net/images/gps.jpg Pascal. -- --|------------------------------------------------------ --| Pascal Obry Team-Ada Member --| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE --|------------------------------------------------------ --| http://www.obry.net --| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination" --| --| gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-key C1082595 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-29 0:28 ` Stephen Leake 2008-03-29 2:48 ` Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-29 23:10 ` John McCabe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-29 23:10 UTC (permalink / raw) Stephen Leake <Stephe.Leake@nasa.gov> wrote: >>>I've been tempted to switch to Eclipse from Emacs, mostly because Java >>>is better for writing structured code than Lisp; I'm getting tired of >>>fighting obscure Lisp code in Emacs. >> >> Oh no - surely not!!! Don't do it Stephe, who'll look after ada-mode >> :-) >It will just wither away and die. I think Emacs is headed in that >direction anyway. I hope not! >> 1) [GPS is] phenomenally ugly, at least on Windows where the GTK widgets >> it uses just don't (in my opinion) look right. Perhaps GPS Pro is >> better? >I guess you haven't seen Emacs on Win32? Not "pretty" by any >standards. But I just ignore that - I'm looking for function over form. I use Emacs on Win32 on a daily basis! It's still my staple text editor, as it's far better than anything else I know of! >> 2) Who uses it outside the Ada world? Can you get full support for >> Python, Perl, PHP, Ant, Java plug-ins for it, what about ? Are you >> ever likely to? > >Right. That's why I'm considering Eclipse. > >> 4) It's got a silly acronym/abbreviation, it's too much like GPS >> (Global Positioning System)! > >That was discussed when it was first announced. It seems AdaCore >thought the conflation might actually be a good thing, since it would >generate attention. With all due respect to AdaCore (again!), that's a bloody stupid attitude - try searching for GPS on the net and what do you get!? >> With all due respect to AdaCore, I do wonder why they ever bothered to >> create GPS - surely IDEs aren't their core business? >They were looking to expand. And many people seem to expect a compiler >to come with a dedicated IDE. I suspect that's partly so they don't >have to figure out how to tell some other IDE to run the compiler. They seem to have misjudged things a bit in my opinion; these days most people (in my experience) expect compilers to provide a means of plugging in to Eclipse or Visual Studio! (Presumably hence the Hibachi project!) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-25 20:32 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-25 21:17 ` John McCabe @ 2008-03-26 10:19 ` John McCabe 2008-03-26 14:35 ` Britt Snodgrass 1 sibling, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-26 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw) On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:32:17 -0700 (PDT), Britt Snodgrass <britt.snodgrass@gmail.com> wrote: Britt >I assume you have make.exe somewhere in your system search path before >starting Eclipse, in addition to the GNAT bin directory. Take a look >inside your .project and .gb_project files to see if they look right >and make sure that the .gb_project file contains the right relative >path to the .gpr file. The contents of my .project file are shown below. My path contains C:\GNAT\2007\bin;C:\GNAT\2007\libexec\gcc\pentium-mingw32msv\4.1.3 right at the start with c:\mingw\bin later on. What is a .gb_project file? I don't have one of those. As I mentioned in my other message, in the <buildCommand> section there is a field for <arguments> to the gnatbench builder. Should there be something in there that will change the directory to the location of the makefile? Again, as I mentioned, if I run this command from within the folder that contains the makefile, it works. If it is run from elsewhere, it doesn't work (which makes perfect sense since the makefile itself is not identified in the command line by a -f option). So why is Eclipse/Gnatbench not changing to the makefile folder before running the command? ==== .project ===== <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <projectDescription> <name>TestAda</name> <comment></comment> <projects> </projects> <buildSpec> <buildCommand> <name>com.adacore.gnatbench.core.GNATbenchBuilder</name> <arguments> </arguments> </buildCommand> </buildSpec> <natures> <nature>com.adacore.gnatbench.core.GNATbenchProjectNature</nature> <nature>org.eclipse.cdt.core.cnature</nature> </natures> </projectDescription> ==== PATH ==== c:\mingw\bin;c:\Qt\4.3.0\bin;c:\Progr am Files\emacs-latest\bin;C:\WINDOWS\system32\WindowsPowerShell\v1.0;C:\Program Files\QuickTime\QTSystem\;C:\Program Fil es\Graphviz2.17\Bin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-26 10:19 ` John McCabe @ 2008-03-26 14:35 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-26 14:40 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-26 18:14 ` John McCabe 0 siblings, 2 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-26 14:35 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mar 26, 5:19 am, John McCabe <j...@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> > What is a .gb_project file? I don't have one of those. > I think the lack of a .gb_project file may be cause of your problem. The GNATbench Ada project wizard is supposed to create a .gb_project file in addition to the .project and .cproject files. In your case it should look something like the following" xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"? ><Root><Properties><com.adacore.gnatbench.isRootProject>true</ com.adacore.gnatbench.isRootProject><com.adacore.gnatbench.gprPath>AdaStartProj.gpr</ com.adacore.gnatbench.gprPath></Properties><Scenarios><BUILD>MF</ BUILD></Scenarios></Root> all on one long line. The "gprPath" part in the middle can contain either an absolute path to your .project file or a relative path, relative to the location of the .project file (i.e. the location of the Eclipse project. My example above was created with GNATbench 2.1.0. My .project file doesn't contain any special arguments in the gnatbench builder section. I think those are always specified either in the Makefile itself or in the .gpr file. Here's the strange part. I spent about 20 minutes last night setting up Eclipse 3.3.2, CDT 3.1.2 and GNATbench 2.0.1 again. When I created a "Hello World" Ada project I encountered almost the same problem you're having - no .gb_project file - and also an error message about not being able to execute gnatls (even though gnatls can be found my Windows system path). I'm pretty sure this all worked last fall when I last used GNATbench 2.0.1 but its not working now. I suspect it is an installation problem but I may not have time to investigate it before next week. I'll let you know. - Britt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-26 14:35 ` Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-26 14:40 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-26 18:14 ` John McCabe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-26 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mar 26, 9:35 am, Britt Snodgrass <britt.snodgr...@gmail.com> wrote: > all on one long line. The "gprPath" part in the middle can contain > either an absolute path to your .project file or a relative path, > relative to the location of the .project file (i.e. the location of > the Eclipse project. Meant to say: all on one long line. The "gprPath" part in the middle can contain either an absolute path to your .GPR file or a relative path, relative to the location of the .project file (i.e. the location of the Eclipse project. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-26 14:35 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-26 14:40 ` Britt Snodgrass @ 2008-03-26 18:14 ` John McCabe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-03-26 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw) On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 07:35:48 -0700 (PDT), Britt Snodgrass <britt.snodgrass@gmail.com> wrote: >On Mar 26, 5:19 am, John McCabe <j...@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>> >> What is a .gb_project file? I don't have one of those. >I think the lack of a .gb_project file may be cause of your problem. >The GNATbench Ada project wizard is supposed to create a .gb_project >file in addition to the .project and .cproject files. Thanks for that. I put that in and it made no difference at all, although I did get some message about gnatls option not being set and something to do with setting it to your target thingy. >Here's the strange part. I spent about 20 minutes last night setting >up Eclipse 3.3.2, CDT 3.1.2 and GNATbench 2.0.1 again. When I created >a "Hello World" Ada project I encountered almost the same problem >you're having - no .gb_project file - and also an error message about >not being able to execute gnatls (even though gnatls can be found my >Windows system path). I'm pretty sure this all worked last fall when >I last used GNATbench 2.0.1 but its not working now. I suspect it is >an installation problem but I may not have time to investigate it >before next week. I'll let you know. I originally had that, before rebooting my system (the PATH didn't appear to accept the GNAT binaries paths without rebooting). Once I rebooted that message disappeared and I was left unable to build. If you get the chance to have another look that would be good (or, even the chance to ask AdaCore if they know about this issue!). Thanks ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: GnatBench (from GPL edition) 2008-03-20 16:35 GnatBench (from GPL edition) John McCabe 2008-03-20 16:46 ` John McCabe @ 2008-04-29 9:34 ` John McCabe 1 sibling, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: John McCabe @ 2008-04-29 9:34 UTC (permalink / raw) On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:35:04 +0000, John McCabe <john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> wrote: >I've just installed the GPL version of GNAT, with Gnatbench 2.0.1 into >Eclipse. I created a new Ada project, a "Hello World" one, and set the >toolchain to gnatmake. When I try to build it I get: > >"Could not execute command 'make >GPRPATH="C:\EclipseWorkspace\AdaStartProj\AdaStartProj.gpr" build" > >Does anyone know why that is? > >Why is it not trying to run gnatmake directly? > >Does it make a difference that I'm using Eclipse Europa (3.3.1.1) and >CDT 4.0.2? Dear all, Thought you might want to know where I've got to on this. With a few pointers from a colleague I've managed to get this to work. My colleague has just started playing with Ada and found that, on his system, the make command didn't work because he didn't have make on the system. By taking the gnumake-3.79.1-nt.exe that comes with GNAT and renaming it to make.exe in the GNAT\2007\bin folder he got it to work. Now, if you've been following this thread, you'll know that I was able to get make to work if I went in to the folder where the files were and ran it. Outside that folder it didn't work. It appears that the fact that GNATBench didn't get it to work, and I didn't get it to work outside the source folder masked the real problem! As it turns out, my "make" command was actuall a "make.bat" file containing: @echo off mingw32-make %* and mingw32-make is on the path. The problem though appears to be related to the lack of a "make.exe" on the path. By copying mingw32-make.exe to make.exe in my C:\MinGW\bin folder, Eclipse will happily build the Ada project. So - result - but it's a bit of a nuisance that the GNATBench builder (or is it Eclipse itself?) needs to actually have make.exe to work! Thank to all of you for your suggestion, and to Alan for his pointers. John ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-04-29 9:34 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 36+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2008-03-20 16:35 GnatBench (from GPL edition) John McCabe 2008-03-20 16:46 ` John McCabe 2008-03-20 22:08 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-25 18:06 ` John McCabe 2008-03-25 20:32 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-25 21:17 ` John McCabe 2008-03-26 21:07 ` Simon Wright 2008-03-26 22:05 ` John McCabe 2008-03-27 9:07 ` Stephen Leake 2008-03-27 10:08 ` John McCabe 2008-03-29 0:28 ` Stephen Leake 2008-03-29 2:48 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-29 23:32 ` John McCabe 2008-03-30 8:24 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2008-03-31 14:23 ` John McCabe 2008-03-31 16:12 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2008-03-31 16:43 ` John McCabe 2008-04-01 0:09 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-01 4:19 ` Eric Hughes 2008-04-01 7:39 ` Georg Bauhaus 2008-04-01 19:52 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-01 19:58 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-02 21:03 ` John McCabe 2008-04-03 3:20 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-03 7:35 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov 2008-04-03 10:20 ` John McCabe 2008-04-04 2:20 ` Randy Brukardt 2008-04-04 22:50 ` John McCabe 2008-04-03 10:14 ` Steffen Huber 2008-04-01 17:06 ` Pascal Obry 2008-03-29 23:10 ` John McCabe 2008-03-26 10:19 ` John McCabe 2008-03-26 14:35 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-26 14:40 ` Britt Snodgrass 2008-03-26 18:14 ` John McCabe 2008-04-29 9:34 ` John McCabe
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox