From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED.IIfIc3CB/+nKo+wKq8+a0g.user.gioia.aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada on Apple's new procesors
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 11:25:05 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <lyftajfnni.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <4d9fa282-830d-42f7-a3bf-ba127cb2ad06o@googlegroups.com>
	<rcsmel$sdb$1@gioia.aioe.org>
	<8332f305-299f-45d7-9f9d-2cad924b24d8o@googlegroups.com>
	<rctfip$1eel$1@gioia.aioe.org>
	<9d941aca-2eb6-4f35-a346-c290c4666bdfo@googlegroups.com>
	<rcu20d$199n$1@gioia.aioe.org>
	<14ffa125-e27d-4d34-8c12-27afb2ea0b13o@googlegroups.com>
	<rcvb2q$1ppg$1@gioia.aioe.org>
	<dee4512c-c851-4438-9561-a4f5b1ff948do@googlegroups.com>
	<rcvs30$h66$1@gioia.aioe.org> <lysgekfmmc.fsf@pushface.org>
	<fdd6703d-ccce-4737-8800-a2ecbcfb626eo@googlegroups.com>
	<lyk0zwfeo5.fsf@pushface.org> <rd0bk6$1qr6$2@gioia.aioe.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: IIfIc3CB/+nKo+wKq8+a0g.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:FUpQjtqDzeJl76+6Sh+cRu5eAbc=
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:59222
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Luke A. Guest" <laguest@archeia.com> writes:

> On 24/06/2020 20:26, Simon Wright wrote:
>>> Yes, option 0 would support only Apple's Intel-based products (and
>>> perhaps still support PowerPC-based defunct products), not the new
>>> ARM-based Mac, which is the entire point of OP.  Without GNAT-LLVM,
>>> no Ada compiler from any vendor on the new ARM-based Mac nor on
>>> iOS/iPadOS devices.  So that is why 2 prior authors omitted option
>>> 0: because it is effectively a degenerate inferior
>>> not-quite-a-full-option.
>> 
>> Thanks for rubbing my nose in this, you really didn't need to do that
>> since Luke has had a good go already (sorry, Luke, I'd forgotten that
>
> Did I?

Apologies! I certainly thought _someone_ had -- but now I can't even
find that. Must have been feeling guilty about something.

>> other Ada users might want to develop for iOS - something they can't
>> do at the moment ofc, and who knows whether there'll be an
>> apple-arm-darwin GCC in the future)
>
> Are you doing that?

No