byarow@rucs2.runet.edu (Brian Mark Yarow) (06/15/91)
The subject line says it all!! It will be for use on a Sun
fileserver. I would appreciate it if anybody could e-mail me a ftp site or
provide any information.
--
Brian Yarow
byarow@rucs2.sunlab.cs.runet.edu
--
Brian Yarow
byarow@rucs2.sunlab.cs.runet.eduerwin@trwacs.UUCP (Harry Erwin) (06/15/91)
byarow@rucs2.runet.edu (Brian Mark Yarow) writes: > The subject line says it all!! It will be for use on a Sun >fileserver. I would appreciate it if anybody could e-mail me a ftp site or >provide any information. It's unlikely that you'll find a certified shareware Ada compiler. DoD was trying to discourage that sort of thing. Harry Erwin erwin@trwacs.fp.trw.com -- Harry Erwin Internet: erwin@trwacs.fp.trw.com
mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) (06/16/91)
In article <309@trwacs.UUCP> erwin@trwacs.UUCP (Harry Erwin) writes: > >It's unlikely that you'll find a certified shareware Ada compiler. DoD was ^^^^^^^^^ I think you mean "validated." >trying to discourage that sort of thing. In ten years of working with Ada vendors and users, and knowing a number of the DoD folks, I can say with confidence that I haven't a SHRED of evidence that DoD "discouraged" anything except the proliferation of NON-VALIDATED compilers. A shareware distributor who wanted to validate would, I'm sure, be encouraged to do so. (Have you spoken to them recently?) Mike
erwin@trwacs.UUCP (Harry Erwin) (06/16/91)
The correct term is validated, not certified. I stand corrected. I don't know of any validated shareware Ada compilers, and I would be surprised at their existence. One major concern of DoD was standardization of Ada, hence the original attempt to copyright the name. There may be people in DoD who would encourage a shareware development, but they are not alone. There are also people who would be very concerned about export controls on Ada. I'll close with that and drop the subject. -- Harry Erwin Internet: erwin@trwacs.fp.trw.com
schweige@aldebaran.cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) (06/17/91)
In article <310@trwacs.UUCP| erwin@trwacs.UUCP (Harry Erwin) writes: |The correct term is validated, not certified. I stand corrected. |I don't know of any validated shareware Ada compilers, and I |would be surprised at their existence. One major concern of |DoD was standardization of Ada, hence the original attempt |to copyright the name. There may be people in DoD who would |encourage a shareware development, but they are not alone. |There are also people who would be very concerned about |export controls on Ada. I'll close with that and drop the |subject. | |-- |Harry Erwin |Internet: erwin@trwacs.fp.trw.com Others have commented as to why there are no validated shareware Ada compilers. Compiler validation is not an inexpensive process. I have never heard, however, of any desire on the part of DoD to prevent shareware or freeware Ada compilers from existing. Compiler validation and control over the validation certification mark is how DoD maintains Ada standardization. The registered trademark status of Ada as the name of a computer programming language was allowed to lapse in 1987. The name was never copyrighted. Ada is a DoD, ANSI and ISO standard, and, as such the comment on export controls on Ada is effectively meaningless. It is a programming language in use in many countries throughout the world. Jeff Schweiger -- ******************************************************************************* Jeff Schweiger Standard Disclaimer CompuServe: 74236,1645 Internet (Milnet): schweige@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil *******************************************************************************