Re: Is this a bug?

[Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@acm.org>]

"Jeff C r e e.m" <jcreem@yahoo.com> writes:

> "Stephen Leake" <stephen_leake@acm.org> wrote in message >
> > Hmm. GCC does not _always_ include Ada; the only language in the root
> > gcc distribution is C; all other languages are in a separate
> > distribution. So "GNAT 3.4.2" to me means "GCC 3.4.2 with Ada
> > support". Seems like a reasonable abbreviation.
> >
> 
> The problem is it seems reasonable but will eventually lead to version 
> number collision.
> GCC 4.0 will be realeased fairly soon (Well somewhat soon).
> 
> GNAT 4.0  was released in 1997.  GNAT 4.0 was a fully certified 
> implementation.  Ada support in GCC 4.0 is likely to be pretty buggy.

All true. But by the time gcc 4.0 is released, it will be clear from
context which is meant.

> I think one can reasonably say (on comp.lang.ada)
> 
> "I compiled the following with gcc 3.4.2"
> 
> And if the sample code is Ada and the error is not "No Ada compiler 
> installed on this system" then we pretty much assume that GNAT stuff is "in 
> there".

That's a good point.

> In any case it is not all that important....But with all the time we
> spend on the ADA v.s. Ada thing it seemed worth a mention ;)

Yep.

I used to insist on using the GNAT public release version numbers in
this forum. But since Ada Core has effectively stopped doing public
releases except via gcc, it seems reasonable to give up on that.

It's always appropriate to say "did you actually mean gcc 3.4.2 with
Ada" if it's not clear from context.

-- 
-- Stephe