Re: PolyORB 1.1r

["Jeff C," <jcreem@yahoo.com>]

"Bruce Conroy" <bruceconroy@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:nRPxc.8431$uX2.4847@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
> A little background. I have been an Ada partisan since 1985 or so. I moved
> many thousand lines of code from Ada 83 to Ada 95 with minor problems. I
> have used the same code on Windows, Solaris and Linux. I have also moved
> many lines of code from one C or C++ compiler to another, and cursed
> Kernigham, Ritchie and Soustrup every time. Ada was portable.
>
> I am starting a new project where CORBA seemed like the solution. I
> downloaded AdaBroker and compiled it with GNAT 3.14p (Debian Sarge). I
> needed another system to test the networking, and my test system is Fedora
> Core 2, gcc 3.3.3-7 (the cutting edge as of May 18.) AdaBroker failed. I
> sent a complaint, and was told "AdaBroker is obsolete, use PolyOrb." I
> tried and found it won't compile under either gnat 3.14p or gcc 3.3.3-7. I
> don't want to spend my time debugging tools needed to get my work done.
> What has happened to the advantage Ada had over C/C++??
>
> blc
>


My guess....You went from using supported compilers and tools to bleeding
edge broken tools (gcc 3.3.3) and/or out of date tools (gnat 3.14p) with a
brand new out of the box public library.

But your point is well taken, clearly two bad experiences with hobbiest
supported tools and libraries after moving many thousands of lines indicates
the language is beyond saving.