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,a73e561812bfa0d4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-08-15 12:42:01 PST From: Simon Wright Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: [GNAT commercial USE] -- can i use GNAT to develop a closed source commercial application ? Date: 15 Aug 2003 20:40:30 +0100 Organization: Pushface Sender: simon@smaug.pushface.org Message-ID: References: <20030815093016.00005ce8._elh_@_terma_._com_> NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1060976520 16071 62.49.19.209 (15 Aug 2003 19:42:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 19:42:00 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!lnsnews.lns.cornell.edu!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!news.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:41531 Date: 2003-08-15T20:40:30+01:00 List-Id: Erlo Haugen <_elh_@_terma_._com_> writes: > The GNAT compiler is not certified, afaik. > Just bear that in mind if your project requieres using Ada. Nor would GCC's C, C++ compilers be, of course. I expect you could get GNAT certified, but you would have to pay ACT quite a bit of money. (The ACATS suite is available for download but it is not, AIUI, easy to use). Last time I asked, many Ada compilers' certificates had run out (I may have misunderstood this). But in any case, the affordable Ada compilers (public GNAT, Aonix, RR .. any others?) are all going to do an excellent job for you. Our viewpoint for our supported GNAT compilers is generally that we believe the compilers could be validated if our customer wanted to pay an extra -whatever- over the contract cost, but neither he nor we will gain from it in practice.