From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f7344,3307180c36b2ddde X-Google-Attributes: gidf7344,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,818bb9686cf8adae X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: cm@mihalis.demon.co.uk (Chris Morgan) Subject: Re: Dec Ditching Ada? Date: 1996/09/11 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 179998229 x-nntp-posting-host: mihalis.demon.co.uk references: <1996Sep5.092514.1@eisner> organization: At Home newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.os.vms Date: 1996-09-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <513a9r$10na@ilx018.iil.intel.com> Uri Raz writes: I doesnt seem to me like the issue is anything about who owns the compiler, whether payments goes for support or developement, or anything the like. The issue is about two questions : 1. Is the GNAT a good Ada compiler ? (= is software X worthy of use ?) 2. Does support give the bang for the bucks, and will continue to do so in the future ? As the first question is ignored in this thread, I think it boils down to the second - would GNAT users get their money's worth of support or not. Well as one user who has a support contract I am qualified to offer my experience as answers to both questions. 1. Is GNAT a good Ada compiler? Yes. If I were to use words and phrases such as "best", "fast", "bullet-proof" need more evidence, but I think everyone agrees that GNAT is a very good Ada compiler. In fact all the Ada95 compilers look like being very good - better than the ones I have had to use for many years in fact. 2. Does support give bang for the bucks We think so. 2. ... and will continue to do so. Who knows? Can't say whether IBM will be around in "the future" let alone small companies like ACT (or mine for that matter). Chris -- cm@mihalis.demon.co.uk Team Ada