From: "Steven J. Zeil" <zeil AT cs DOT odu DOT edu>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 09:16:51 -0400
To: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Subject: Re: GNAT - Ada frontend for Djgpp question
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
References: <40ke9k$mdb AT freenet DOT vancouver DOT bc DOT ca> <40n13f$qn7 AT phcoms4 DOT seri DOT philips DOT nl> <somebody DOT loopback DOT edu-150895112838 AT ou098008 DOT otago DOT ac DOT nz>


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