Re: Standard Ada Preprocessor

[Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>]

Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> writes:

> Sure, isolate it in a body. Write a monograph about how to hide
> compiler, target, OS, and other platform dependencies in a
> body. I'll try to follow it. Now give me a way to select *which*
> body I want via some standard compiler mechanism that I can count on
> having available. Shell scripts, makefiles or other build process
> mechanisms are simply pushing *that* problem off in another layer of
> indirection - and its a non-portable, uncertain layer at that.

I'm probably missing the point here, but as I recall the C side of
things has a humungous incomprehensible heap of autoconf, m4, shell
scripts, GNU make only, imake .. people are happy enough with that,
where's the problem on the Ada side in selecting the right source file
variant?

I've just added support for arrays to my UML-to-Ada generator, under
pressure. I _know_ I'm going to regret it, people are just bound to
decide to (eg) implement their own associations using them rather than
rely on the built-ins .. if you give people a bad feature they will
use it badly. Of course the market rules here, shame really ..

-- 
Simon Wright                               100% Ada, no bugs.