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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: More reliable compilers (of some programming langauges) than GNAT
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 18:17 +0200
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <ov1jjc$1duo$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <ov1fg0$15sq$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <26576633-989a-4762-abe8-c4660e9fae31@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: edFHTOfx8phAphItWrZ8cQ.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: KNode/4.14.10
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: feeder.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:49037
Date: 2017-11-21T18:17:00+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

AdaMagica wrote:

> Am Dienstag, 21. November 2017 16:07:47 UTC+1 schrieb Victor Porton:
>> Ada is good.
>> 
>> But I have caught a few GNAT bugs while writing my software. It is too
>> bad.
>> 
>> Would you recommend me another language (not Ada) which has a quality
>> free compiler?
> 
> Now seriously:
> 
> Gnat is a very good compiler, I used it for a real time full scale flight
> simulator for helicopters. Yes, I stepped over compiler problems. We had
> an AdaCore contract, and in most cases I got a workaround within a few
> hours or, if needed, a wavefront in one day.

I work in a nonprofit, I cannot afford GNAT PRO.

I wrote to AdaCore asking a free license for my nonprofit, but they didn't 
give.

> I'd never give up Ada because of a compiler with some bugs. You certainly
> will find workarounds.
-- 
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org