Mail Archives: djgpp/1995/08/15/10:10:46
Somebody writes:
> ...Ada is a f***ing HUGE language and takes
> quite a while to learn, and GNAT doesn't implement all features (esp.
> tasking) on Dos yet.
Having programmed extensively with both Ada and C++ and worked on
translators for them both, I do have to say that it is a real toss-up
as to which is the "larger" and harder-to-learn language (to say
nothing of harder-to-translate). If you are referring to C (not C++)
versus Ada, your point about "language size" is valid, though ease of
learning will still be debated hotly by language zealots on both sides.
>
> >
> > Notice that GNAT is not just a front end but a real compiler. It is linked
> > agains the gcc backend however.
>
> indicating that it's not a compiler. One of the papers published by the
> team developing GNAT tells you that - the name stands for GNU NYU Ada
> Translator. it just turns Ada source code into the required form for the
> GCC back end, so it really is just a front end.
>
An odd and potentially misleading comment. Nearly all compilers
consist of coupled front and back ends. By this argument, the GNU C
and C++ translators are not compilers either, since each consists of a
front end (cc1 and cc1plus) that turn C and C++ source code "into the
required form for the GCC back end".
--------------------
I think the GNAT folks have done the community a great service by
making this Ada compiler availabler free of charge, just as I think
the GNU folks have done us all a great service by releasing the GCC
system. Personally, I'm glad to have the wealth of choices.
Steve Z
- Raw text -