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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c1983ae2deb642ab
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-28 11:13:51 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!skates!not-for-mail
From: Stephen Leake <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada -vs- GNAT
Date: 28 May 2002 14:09:01 -0400
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (skates.gsfc.nasa.gov)
Message-ID: <uznyki1qa.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>
References: <sXCH8.103053$Po6.225647@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>
 <5ee5b646.0205250302.6afa3dcc@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: anarres.gsfc.nasa.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: skates.gsfc.nasa.gov 1022609760 23693 128.183.220.71 (28 May 2002
 18:16:00 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.gsfc.nasa.gov
NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 May 2002 18:16:00 GMT
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24874
Date: 2002-05-28T18:16:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes:

> <snip>
> I actually am arguing very strongly for 3.2 to require 3.1 in the FSF
> environment for all sorts of reasons 

These days, when it is relatively easy to get a binary for gcc version
n-1 on most development boxes, this seems a reasonable course of
action.

> (it is interesting to note that those arguing against it are people
> who are typically outside the Ada community who are used to being
> able to compile C with any old compiler :-)

There have been times (in the not-so-distant past) when the only way I
could get a Gnu C compiler on a Sun box was to compile gcc with
the Sun C compiler. Then, the requirement "be able to compile Gnu gcc
with any old C compiler" was essential.

GNAT was never in that situation, and is in fact more widely available
than other Ada compilers, so the requirement "compile GNAT n with GNAT
n-1" is reasonable.

I don't think I'll every be tempted to compile GNAT for a 1750 host
with the DDCI compiler :).

-- 
-- Stephe