> well, we (i.e the general public :) only really need ONE good, open
> source Ada compiler any way. right?
> Look at Java for example, oracle's Java is all there is really. In
> open source, it is openJDK. That is the Java that everyone uses. That
> is what I use on Linux and windows.
No again. There are many JVMs and many compilers. Depends what you need and
where you need it. google a search on JVM and you will be surprised how many
companies and versions there are.
> I do not see a problem with having just one Ada compiler. As
> long as it is open, and free to use, and is good.
GNAT is certainly very good. But it is a pain in the ass in many ways. It is
GPL only and even if you use gcc Ada eventually that is going to cause
problems as GPL moves from GPL2 to 3, and who knows what's next. LGPL
libraries today, tomorrow everythings GPL, you trusted them, you put all
your eggs in one basket, you got screwed.
Green Hills (don't know about HQ but the international office I spoke with)
are a bunch of pricks. When they found out I wasn't calling from Hughes
Aircraft or Boeing they wouldn't even quote me a price.
Back to GNAT, it is often not (easily) available on many POSIX platforms and
architectures. We have discussed Librecore's abandonment of Solaris
recently. There is still a lot of SPARC UNIX being used and no place to get
a trusted build and no instructions on building yourself. I'm not even sure
there is an Intel Solaris GNAT available anywhere. Is it really that hard
for people who "have the technology" to make this available? Yes, we are
willing to pay for something as good as GNAT, just not $20,000. Not for one
person who isn't going to make any money on it. gcc Ada would be fine (until
Stallman drops his GPL bomb on the libraries) but it's only available on
Linux and Windows. There are other OS in the world. At least if there would
be instructions somewhere how to build it, it would be used a lot more. I
guess nobody in a position to do anything about that cares.
> What is needed for Ada, is more Ada libraries, not more Ada
I agree we need more non-GPL libraries but I think we need more compilers
and more competition. "Libre" is strangling the business and guess what, the
US government paid for GNAT to be developed in the first place. I'd like to
hear how that becomes a whole privately held company but corruption and
graft in the public sector is nothing new.
By the way, no offense intended to Dr. Dewar. Nice job if you can get it. I
blame the guys who funded it and then allowed it to become owned by one
Many people on comp.lang.ada have expressed an interest in buying a
development system. But so far none of the vendors except RR are willing to
talk to that kind of potential customer. I tried RR a few years ago but the
sample executables already didn't run on my 64 bit Linux. It's hard to tell
from the website that anything much has happened since 1995. If I didn't
read this newsgroup once in awhile I would have no idea the product is still
being updated. I would like to hear more updates and what platforms the
current products work on. I don't think anybody would object to that here
because Mr. Brukhardt is a valued member and contributes plenty to the
discussion, he is obviously not selling his products on the newsgroup. I
wish he would a little though so we can understand exactly what is
Most people who buy any kind of compiler also need a good GUI debugger
to go with it. If that isn't available many people probably won't be
interested. I don't know what AONIX pricing is or if they have any suitable
I don't like to bother people if I am not sure I am going to spend the money
so personally I like websites with full info on supported environments and
simple to understand all-included products rather than "Contact US and a
salesman will call" or "Request a quote". And yes I do buy software and have
purchased a non-Ada development system in the past. I realize stuff does
cost people money to develop and I don't expect to get anything handed to
me. On the other hand I don't expect to have to beg anyone to sell me
something, indeed I don't ever do that.