This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Ada files now checked in
- To: Richard Kenner <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
- Subject: Re: Ada files now checked in
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 13:39:43 -0700
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <10110041920.AA26536@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 03:20:47PM -0400, Richard Kenner wrote:
> 1. Any compilation of an Ada source file (.ads or .adb) might have to
> use a different program from the one used to compile C source.
> I don't think we want or need to support that. It adds unnecessary
> complexity and confusion.
On the contrary, it is the only way to make the CVS tree build without
extra effort on the part of every person building it.
> Now, the aclocal.m4 gook has the sole purpose of setting ADAC and
> GNATBIND correctly. GNATBIND is easy - just call AC_CHECK_TOOL.
> (AC_CHECK_PROG was being used, but that will pick the wrong program in
> a cross-compilation.) ADAC is trickier.
> Again, I don't think we want to go to this much trouble to support
> non-standard configurations. This is a new front-end: we don't need to
> burden it with backwrds-compatibility like this.
I thought I had made clear why this was necessary.
This is not a nonstandard configuration that I have. This is the way
GNAT has been packaged for most Linux distributions for as long as
I've been paying attention to these things. It's very simple. There
is one compiler driver that knows about all the languages included in
the primary GCC distribution. Each add-on language (Ada, Pascal, etc)
has its own driver, which knows only about its own language.
I therefore have the following three choices:
I can jump through extensive hoops to construct a private bootstrap
compiler which speaks both C and Ada and use that. I will not do
this, because a major reason why I do daily builds is to make sure
that the CVS tree can be compiled and tested using only stock
I can fix the Makefiles, as I have done, so that they comprehend
this *common* configuration and work correctly.
Or I can ignore Ada until the system compiler becomes one that
understands it. This probably won't happen until 2003 or so. I
guarantee you this is the choice most people will make.
I should point out that the distribution maintainers may choose to
continue off-loading Ada into a separate package, if they have the
choice between that and jumping through the above-mentioned hoops to
build the C compiler. Thus you may be *permanently* stuck with the
dual driver situation, and therefore with a dramatically reduced
potential user base, if you refuse to give us a transition plan away