I just tried to build the git cloned copy of polyorb (failed on the configure!) with the 2020 community version of GNAT. It said I had no gnat ada compiler. It was on the path and it pointed to the gcc compiler on the path. Are they compatible? Is there still a polyorb "enthusiast" list ?
On 03/08/2020 12:04, tonyg wrote:
> I just tried to build the git cloned copy of polyorb (failed on the configure!) with the 2020 community version of GNAT. It said I had no gnat ada compiler. It was on the path and it pointed to the gcc compiler on the path. Are they compatible? Is there still a polyorb "enthusiast" list ?
>
Distributed annex is being removed from gnat due to "lack of customer
interest."
On Monday, August 3, 2020 at 5:42:02 AM UTC-6, Luke A. Guest wrote:
> On 03/08/2020 12:04, tonyg wrote:
> > I just tried to build the git cloned copy of polyorb (failed on the configure!) with the 2020 community version of GNAT. It said I had no gnat ada compiler. It was on the path and it pointed to the gcc compiler on the path. Are they compatible? Is there still a polyorb "enthusiast" list ?
> >
>
> Distributed annex is being removed from gnat due to "lack of customer interest."
This is pretty sad, and IMO, stupid; the ability to [relatively] easily make distributed applications via DSA is a killer feature and, in conjunction with Ada2020 'parallel' blocks/loops would make for a very attractive system.
IOW, the "lack of customer interest" is an excuse to shoot themselves in the foot.
On 03/08/2020 15:47, Shark8 wrote: > On Monday, August 3, 2020 at 5:42:02 AM UTC-6, Luke A. Guest wrote: >> On 03/08/2020 12:04, tonyg wrote: >>> I just tried to build the git cloned copy of polyorb (failed on the configure!) with the 2020 community version of GNAT. It said I had no gnat ada compiler. It was on the path and it pointed to the gcc compiler on the path. Are they compatible? Is there still a polyorb "enthusiast" list ? >>> >> >> Distributed annex is being removed from gnat due to "lack of customer interest." > > This is pretty sad, and IMO, stupid; the ability to [relatively] easily make distributed applications via DSA is a killer feature and, in conjunction with Ada2020 'parallel' blocks/loops would make for a very attractive system. > > IOW, the "lack of customer interest" is an excuse to shoot themselves in the foot. The reality is a bit more complex. Distributed Annex is based on RPC. Ada is largely used in the field applications, embedded, real-time. RPC are pretty much useless there, as well as in massively parallel applications. For service-oriented sluggish applications RPC might be OK, but CORBA is a blocker there, because static topology/configuration is too rigid for such applications. (Static topology is less and less tolerated in the former as well) P.S. I have an almost ready distributed Annex implementation based on inter process communication (no network, same box), but I have no information how to dock it into GNAT. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
On 03/08/2020 14:47, Shark8 wrote:
> On Monday, August 3, 2020 at 5:42:02 AM UTC-6, Luke A. Guest wrote:
>> On 03/08/2020 12:04, tonyg wrote:
>>> I just tried to build the git cloned copy of polyorb (failed on the configure!) with the 2020 community version of GNAT. It said I had no gnat ada compiler. It was on the path and it pointed to the gcc compiler on the path. Are they compatible? Is there still a polyorb "enthusiast" list ?
>>>
>>
>> Distributed annex is being removed from gnat due to "lack of customer interest."
>
> This is pretty sad, and IMO, stupid; the ability to [relatively] easily make distributed applications via DSA is a killer feature and, in conjunction with Ada2020 'parallel' blocks/loops would make for a very attractive system.
>
> IOW, the "lack of customer interest" is an excuse to shoot themselves in the foot.
>
The alternative is keep a local tree with the removal patches revoked.