Re: Ada lacks lighterweight-than-task parallelism

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"Mehdi Saada" <00120260a@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:64a526cb-e6d5-44a6-b446-5b652ebe60ca@googlegroups.com...
>Considering how complicate writing Ada compilers already is, and
>seeing that there is no standard interface between those and tools - as
>far as I get it - it would likely make the hypothetic compilers huge and
>considering GNAT is the only one implementing (most) of the 2012
>version, fusing tools and compilers might close for good the Ada
>compilers market.
>Haven't you been promoting free market ?
>Stop me if I made a mistake.

For what it's worth, I agree (somewhat) with Dmitry. Not so much about SPARK 
(the reliance on outside logic provers seems unnecessary for most work), but 
more like CodePeer. CodePeer is one of a variety of static analysis tools 
that are based on compiler optimization technology. It seems to me that that 
such technology should be an intergral part of an Ada compiler's optimizer 
(a lot of it exists anyway). In part because anything it can prove will also 
allow making smaller/faster code (for instance, proving that a check cannot 
fail also means that the compiler need not generate code for that check).

This does imply a need for Ada-specific optimization (which might be an 
issue in a GCC/LLVM environment - although I think it can be dealt with).

Anyone have a few extra million $$$ laying around so I can build this?? ;-)

                                     Randy.

P.S. The next Janus/Ada release, scheduled for late July, will have a small 
corner of that capability implemented. There'll be a blog entry on 
rrsoftware.com once the compiler details are settled.