Re: Meet the new GPS...same as the old GPS...

[M E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>]

randomm@mindless.com writes:

> X-Archive-No: Yes
> 
> M E Leypold wrote:
> > randomm@mindless.com writes:
> 
> snip
> 
> > Yes. Use Emacs and Gnatmake if you have pure Ada projects,
> > additionally use (Gnu) make if you also need to generate Ada files
> > from other descriptions. I'm also using Cygwin as a shell enviroment
> > to build on windows (logging in with ssh remotely).
> >
> > I think that is a good way to go. If you need, I can post parts of
> > Makefiles, build scripts, and project files, just ask specifically.
> 
> Thanks very much, indeed.  I'm just starting to try to learn Ada and
> I'm cutting and pasting examples and trying my own small programs.  I'm
> having so much difficulty getting started with the toolset that I don't
> really know what to ask about.  I suppose aside from a basic
> understanding of Ada I need to understand how an Ada project is put
> together.  I found some excellents texts on Ada and I intend to go
> through them all but I haven't seen a discussion of how a project is
> managed (since that's properly the province of the toolset
> documentation).

Exactly. Its outside of the scope of the language definition.

You might start by just using the shell to invoke the Editor on single
source files (in GNAT a compilation unit corresponds to a file:
procedure, package or package body). Then invoke gnatmake on the
program main file (procedure), like this:

   gnatmake foo

That will generate foo from foo.adb (which must contain Procedure
Foo). Gnatmake will take care of all dependencies automatically, so
there is no need to managing anything very much at that point.

(Later: Use a version control system, perhaps, but only in projects
 not pure Ada, use make as a wrapper around gnatmake. I'll send you my
 makefile(s) when need arises).

> Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be the case with Ada which seems
> understandable given its niche but a shame nevertheless.  In my
> short time examining it, Ada appears to have some extremely nice
> features that are lacking in other HLLs.

ACK. But ... (well, lets skip that :-)). If you want to discuss modern
languages for possible commercial enterprise (I usually like to title
that "languages for the third millenium"), write me privately. This is
comp.lang.ada after all and therefore probably not the right place to
discuss alternatives (interpret that as fallbacks). I hope I can get
you in contact with other smart people (that doesn't include me, but
I'll be here) which like to discuss these things and which are also
advising me sometimes on these issues.

Regards -- Markus