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,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,bdd927ef8bb6088d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Vladimir Olensky" <vladimir_olensky@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Announcing GNAT version 3.12p for Linux and Sparc Solaris
Date: 1999/10/28
Message-ID: <s1g8to9ar0831@corp.supernews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 541578344
References: <7uia7h$kn4$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <231019991644109306%hopperj@macconnect.com> <3812878f_4@news1.prserv.net>
 <241019991113025768%hopperj@macconnect.com>
 <m3wvs9n5y4.fsf@yakisoba.forte-intl.com> <7v5ot0$32j$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com
Date: 1999-10-28T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote in message <7v5ot0$32j$1@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <m3wvs9n5y4.fsf@yakisoba.forte-intl.com>,
>  Ronald Cole <ronald@forte-intl.com> wrote:
>
>> Does someone know whether we'll see gnat
>> merged into the gcc-3.0 release?
>
>That's precisely the plan, assuming the name of the new
>merged version is in fact gcc-3.0 (there is some rediscussion
>of this fact), then this is indeed the version at which we
>expect the merge to take place, i.e. that is the version of
>GCC that we will use internally at ACT, patches we develop
>needed by GNAT will go into this tree, and all released
>versions of GNAT (both the commercial versions of GNAT
>Professional, and the public versions of GNAT) will be based
>on this technology.


It is interesting if there exist any plans to add  a compiler/linker
support for individual procedure/function packaging and linking
as in  MSVC to be able to produce applications  that do not
contain unreferenced code (big problem for big common use
monolithic libraries/packages - this was discussed some
time ago).

With such functionality  this would be superior product.

Is ACT is going to push this issue ?

Regards,
Vladimir Olensky