Revision as of 14:09, 30 July 2001 edit Buzco (talk \| contribs) 0 edits No edit summary		Revision as of 14:33, 30 July 2001 edit undo Buzco (talk \| contribs) 0 edits Reorganized into threads. Next edit →
Line 1: <b>~~Comments~~Moved ~~moved~~comments here from main text. Reorganized into threads.</b>--[[buzco]] ---- Really only used anymore in US Department of Defense stuff. Oh yeah, and Ada95, the most popular Ada compiler actually translates your code to C, then compiles the C. I love that. ----▼ :Ada95 is ''not'' a compiler, it is a version of Ada, the most recent version, I believe. I am also skeptical of the idea that Ada is "really only used anymore" in the US DOD. :Do you mean GNAT (GNU Ada Translater) when writing "Ada95"? This is no translater to C any longer but a frontend to the GNU Compiler Collection, as the C or the Java frontends are. By the way, it is _not_ used only by DOD staff and it is a highly capable language. In contrast to the popular misbelief it produces rather fast code (comparable to C).▼ ▲:---- :The team behind Gnat used in the beginning a proprietary Ada compiler and used that to build an compiler which implemented a subset of Ada big enough to support building itself. Now the team left that proprietary compiler in the dust. After that it was a simple matter of extending that they already have while using the base to build the next more evolved version. :Gnat until 3.11 or so (ca 1999) needed to generate a C stub for the sake of elaboration but that liability is no more !!▼ :GNAT never was a Ada-to-C translator ! ▼ :cfront was a c++-to-c translator !▼ ---- Ada is used in a few compiler theory books because of its comprehensiveness and elegance. ~~----~~ ▲Do you mean GNAT (GNU Ada Translater) when writing "Ada95"? This is no translater to C any longer but a frontend to the GNU Compiler Collection, as the C or the Java frontends are. By the way, it is _not_ used only by DOD staff and it is a highly capable language. In contrast to the popular misbelief it produces rather fast code (comparable to C). ---- Should there be a section on primary users of a language like ada and how their requirements affected the language? ---- ~~The team behind Gnat used in the beginning a proprietary~~ ~~Ada compiler and used that to build an compiler which~~ ~~implemented a subset of Ada big enough to support building~~ ~~itself. Now the team left that proprietary compiler in~~ ~~the dust.~~ ~~After that it was a simple matter of extending~~ ~~that they already have while using the base to build the next~~ ~~more evolved version.~~ ~~Gnat until 3.5 or so (5 years ago) needed to generate a C~~ ▲stub for the sake of elaboration but that liability ~~is no more !!~~ ▲GNAT never was a Ada-to-C translator ! ▲cfront was a c++-to-c translator ! Ada has some tastes of Pascal still but not one of the bad ones. --[[Janet Davis]]

Talk:Ada (programming language): Difference between revisions