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,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,53c5fea49e77990c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-29 18:04:06 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!deine.net!freenix!enst!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: "Alexandre E. Kopilovitch" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Dot Net ? Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 05:08:32 +0300 (MSK) Organization: ENST, France Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1017453842 22491 137.194.161.2 (30 Mar 2002 02:04:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 02:04:02 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: X-Mailer: Mail/@ [v2.44 MSDOS] Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21872 Date: 2002-03-30T05:08:32+03:00 "WJT" wrote: >The reason I want to know is that I have been developing in C# lately. I >started using the command line compiler that comes free with the SDK. And >believe it or not I was generating some impressive GUI applications using >nothing more than a text editor. I do not attribute this to the superiority >of the C# language, I attribute it to the Common Language Runtime (CLR) and >its class libraries that make Windows programming .... well, actually >enjoyable. That your excitement clearly shows that you have no previous experience with Borland Delphi. Well. it isn't suprising that the chief architect of Delphi, and the author of C#, and probably one of the main architectcs of the .NET is the same person. >The entire OS (or 99% of it) is available as an OO class library! This is a huge overstatement, I think. It may be so for major part of GUI and some broad classes of services, but very far from "entire OS". >The real reason that I would like to have an Ada95 compiler on such a >platform (and hopefully developed as a plug-in for MS Visual Studio) is >well...just because. Because I've dedicated over 20 years of my life to the >little lady (mostly using her in embedded systems) and would really like to >see here catch the boat this time. This isn't a technical reason. And Ada tries to follow the technical reasons. >I know what I want, and I know what is needed. Well, then, perhaps, you can express that in technical terms? >P.S. Just for the record, when it comes to Cross Compilers for Embedded >Systems nothing in the industry even comes close to Ada, not even close. Ada >has made programming large real-time embedded systems an absolute pleasure, >a pure joy compared to any other language in existence !!! Well, good. Every programming language has its "virtual machine", sometimes more or less specified explicitly, sometimes hidden. Ada is unique (at least among the standartized languages) in that respect: there are TWO different virtual machines - one for a host, and another for a target. And when you speak about CLR you touch the target virtual machine, while when you speak about Visual Studio plug-in, you touch the host virtual machine. It isn't clear from your speech, which one you consider most important to be plugged to the .NET . Wes Groleau wrote: >.Net and C# are basically an attempt to make a >Microsoft-controlled alternative to Java. That may be partially true, but notice, that "Microsoft-controlled" is secondary, while "alternative to Java" is primary, and very desirable thing - not for Microsoft only. >I'd like to see Ada on .Net, but I know that >Gates & Co. will do everything they can get away >with to make it incompatible with any other Ada, >just like they did with Java. This surely will be so for Microsoft Visual Ada++, but not for an independent vendor, For example, "WJT" wrote: >The Ada95 language definition has enough flexibility to fit on the .Net >platform through the use of 'allowable and documented restrictions', >implementation defined attributes, pragmas and of course there is always >implementation specific packages. Ada95 does not have enough flexibility to fit immediately on a platform which have many vaguely specified but still powerful features. Don't forget, that Microsoft always stands for "freedom for innovation", which effectively means "no guarantee for any feature". Alexander Kopilovitch aek@vib.usr.pu.ru Saint-Petersburg Russia