Re: Separate Compilation in Programming Languages

[Ray Blaak <rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net>]

<adaworks@sbcglobal.net> writes:
> "Robert A Duff" <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote in message 
> news:wccfxverpyo.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com...
> >
> > I agree.  I'm completely mystified by Richard's assertion that the
> > existence of gnatmake might indicate a problem with GNAT.  Any decent
> > Ada implementation comes with a tool that knows how to rebuild (what to
> > recompile/relink/whatever, and in what order, if that matters) based on
> > what source files changed.  The fact that such a tool can exist is one
> > thing that makes Ada better than (for example) C.
> >
> It was not my intention to suggest any problem with GNAT.   I probably
> did not phrase my response to the question very well.

In the interests of keeping any controversy alive, if you accept the use of
tools that help an Ada compiler know what to rebuild based on what source
files have changed, how is the use of tools that help a Java compiler to do
the same thing a sign of deficient dependency control? I.e. Ant.

-- 
Cheers,                                        The Rhythm is around me,
                                               The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak                                      The Rhythm is inside me,
rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net                    The Rhythm has my soul.