Re: can one build commercial applications with latest gnat and other licenses related questions...

[M E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>]

"Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.not.jrcarter@acm.not.spam.org> writes:

> M E Leypold wrote:
> > That too. I stopped reading after "is 10% of the cost of an ACT"
> > since 5000 is not 10% of 15000.
> 
> Sorry, I remembered $1500 (which is 10% of $15000), but that's only

Never mind. I should also have read you statement to the end. Lame
excuse: It was late and I was already tired from bombing c.l.a with
mails on licensing issues.

> for the Windows version. The Linux version is unaccountably much
> more. I guess they think people who use a free OS have more money
> available for compilers.

Oh certainly.

May I add one thing (not as reproach on what you said, but rather
continuing the free OS theme here): My skill set is primarily in
unixish systems especially as far as the enviroment (available tools,
shell, scripting) goes. In this ongoing discussion I got offered (more
than once) compilers as subsitute which would only run on windows,
have certain important libraries only for windows or are substantially
more expensive on non windows platforms. But I hope one can understand
that as a Unix animal I'm not looking for a windows compiler.

The big advantage of Ada could be that it is really portable. I did
sucessfully develop programs under Linux and just compiled them on
windows. This is big plus. Or it could be. Because if you look at the
compiler market, the choices become very restricted (or expensive) if
one wants to compile on both platforms, develop primarily with Linux
and wants more than the Ada standard library.


Regards -- Markus