bertrand@cui.UUCP (IBRAHIM Bertrand) (10/25/88)
I am currently using Verdix Ada Development System (VADS 5.5) on SUN 3/50
and 3/60 machines. Our site is running SunOS 3.5 and might soon move to
SunOS 4.0. Our local vendor told us that they didn't have yet any Ada
environment running under SunOS 4.0. Is this correct?
Since we intend to buy some new licences, are there other vendors selling
Ada environments running under SunOS 4.0?
As a subsidiary question, is there (will there be) an Ada environment for
SUN4 machines?
advTHANKSance for your help.
B. Ibrahim
to BITNET to EAN
from
BITNET IBRAHIM@CGEUGE51.BITNET bertrand%cui.unige.ch@CERNVAX
ARPA IBRAHIM%CGEUGE51.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU bertrand%cui.unige.ch@ubc.csnet
UUCP cernvax!cui!bertrand.uucp
UUCP mcvax!cernvax!cui!bertrand.uucp
UUCP cui!bertrand@cernvax.UUCP
EAN bertrand@cui.unige.chkaram@sce.carleton.ca (Gerald Karam) (10/28/88)
In article <248@cui.UUCP> bertrand@cui.UUCP (IBRAHIM Bertrand) writes: >I am currently using Verdix Ada Development System (VADS 5.5) on SUN 3/50 >and 3/60 machines. Our site is running SunOS 3.5 and might soon move to >SunOS 4.0. Our local vendor told us that they didn't have yet any Ada >environment running under SunOS 4.0. Is this correct? we are currently holding back on our migration to 4.0 because of similar verdix ada problems. we have been told o/s 4.0 is coming but have no firm date. other software packages are also behind on the migration. i guess we just have to sit on our hands :-) gerald karam
billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,) (10/29/88)
From article <248@cui.UUCP>, by bertrand@cui.UUCP (IBRAHIM Bertrand): > I am currently using Verdix Ada Development System (VADS 5.5) on SUN 3/50 > and 3/60 machines. Our site is running SunOS 3.5 and might soon move to > SunOS 4.0. Our local vendor told us that they didn't have yet any Ada > environment running under SunOS 4.0. Is this correct? > > Since we intend to buy some new licences, are there other vendors selling > Ada environments running under SunOS 4.0? The Telesoft people have what looks like a wonderful product; we here at Clemson are evaluating it for our Suns running 4.0. Telesoft has an extremely good compiler interface (windows, electronic buttons for the mouse to click on, etc); their debugger does not look quite as strong, though. They have a profiler and automatic recompilation facilities. Also, the optimization facilities in their latest release result in code which, if Telesoft's benchmarks are believable, result in code which runs faster than the code produced by current C compilers. They also exhibited the code generated by the Verdix Ada product (about 35 instructions) at Tri-Ada '88, contrasting it with the mere three instructions generated under total optimization mode by their product, for one particular (no doubt strategically selected) benchmark. The Telesoft people, apparently highly confident of the quality of their product, invited me to the Telesoft User's Group meeting; I found great praise for Telesoft's customer support, and no gripes whatsoever. About the only thing I could find at all to pick on regarding Telesoft is that their debugger was apparently left in a bare-bones condition while personnel were diverted to the mission of creating a compiler which could out-optimize C compilers; it looks like they've declared victory now and started to focus more attention on enhancing the debugger. Alsys has a product which has a very nice debugger interface, but unfortunately is not very crash-proof; for example, any attempt to examine an object which is locally declared within a package initialization will crash the debugger. The AdaWorld compiler environment is OK, but it really could have used some of the pull-down menus, etc., which were incorporated into the AdaProbe debugger -- a very nice product, if only it didn't itself need debugging!!! The Verdix people claimed that their product did run on SunOS 4.0; however, Verdix seems to take user-hostility to new heights. Their claim to be "integrated into the Unix environment" seems to carry the hidden caveat "By the way, you *do* like keyboard commands, just as cryptic as we can possibly make them?"; in view of the vastly superior user interfaces provided by Alsys and Telesoft, the Verdix product was quickly rejected.
dharvey@wsccs.UUCP (David Harvey) (11/09/88)
In article <3372@hubcap.UUCP>, billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,) writes: > The Telesoft people have what looks like a wonderful product; > we here at Clemson are evaluating it for our Suns running 4.0. > > Telesoft has an extremely good compiler interface (windows, > electronic buttons for the mouse to click on, etc); their > debugger does not look quite as strong, though. They have > <.......stuff deleted.......> > > The Verdix people claimed that their product did run on SunOS 4.0; > however, Verdix seems to take user-hostility to new heights. Their > claim to be "integrated into the Unix environment" seems to carry > the hidden caveat "By the way, you *do* like keyboard commands, > just as cryptic as we can possibly make them?"; in view of the > vastly superior user interfaces provided by Alsys and Telesoft, > the Verdix product was quickly rejected. Not having worked with the Verdix product or having anything to do with the company, I don't know exactly what you mean by "user-hostility." But if it means that you prefer an icon interface (ala Xerox PARC) over a command line interface I can only conclude you prefer to use the machine rather than program it. The Macintosh is the most frustrating equipment I have worked on to date! On my Amiga I notice that when I USE the machine I prefer using the mouse and clicking. When I PROGRAM the machine I favor a CLI (or shell if you prefer). The reason is simple. It is easier for me to get something done, and I get it done faster. This point was not lost on Steve Jobs when creating the NeXT machine, and prominent mention is made that the Iconic interface is NOT the best for a programmer. He also has listened (Steve listening to anyone!?) to his programmers and has developed very strong tools for programmers to use in the shell environment, not with the Postscript interface. My main point in writing is to reveal that having an icon based development system is not necessarily the best way to go, especially for the programmer. As to the claim that an Ada compiler beats a C compiler (especially for smaller programs), I just plain don't believe it. VAX Ada is especially a hog for smaller student projects. For larger projects (say 100,000+ LOC) all bets are off. But then, that was what Ada was made for, right? As a side note I have worked with both Telesoft Ada and VAX Ada. Neither one even comes close to the pcc on our Ultrix machine or the Aztec compiler in terms of either size of code or speed of execution. But students don't even care about those figures. All they care about is how fast they can DEVELOP their programs since they rarely run them more than once or twice anyway. So don't be too fast to write a product off, especially for students who actually love a command line interface!
karam@sce.carleton.ca (Gerald Karam) (11/16/88)
In article <770@wsccs.UUCP> dharvey@wsccs.UUCP (David Harvey) writes: >In article <3372@hubcap.UUCP>, billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,) writes: >> The Telesoft people have what looks like a wonderful product; >> we here at Clemson are evaluating it for our Suns running 4.0. >> >> Telesoft has an extremely good compiler interface (windows, >> electronic buttons for the mouse to click on, etc); their ...more... >> >> The Verdix people claimed that their product did run on SunOS 4.0; >> however, Verdix seems to take user-hostility to new heights. Their >> claim to be "integrated into the Unix environment" seems to carry >> the hidden caveat "By the way, you *do* like keyboard commands, >> just as cryptic as we can possibly make them?"; in view of the ...more... >> the Verdix product was quickly rejected. > >Not having worked with the Verdix product or having anything to do with >the company, I don't know exactly what you mean by "user-hostility." >But if it means that you prefer an icon interface (ala Xerox PARC) over >a command line interface I can only conclude you prefer to use the >machine rather than program it. Verdix provides an environment that is command line driven and a clone of unix. for example, to list your ada program units, you would type "a.ls". As a Unix user its great. I just have to preface commands with "a." and i have equivalent features in my ada environment. its quite clever, assuming you like unix. (you need an ada paginator/pretty? enter a.pr, need to find out space utilization? a.du etc). of course, this frugality of the interface is no excuse for these ease with which i have broken the compiler, but then again i try strange but legal things. i felt the same interference with software development when i started to use a MAC. what i can say with a couple of key strokes some regular expressions and a pipe or two, could not be matched on the MAC. It makes great pictures though, and i could teach my mother how to use it in a few minutes (apologies mom :-), but i wouldn't trade my unix workstation for 10 macs. gerald karam
lrs@esl.ESL.COM (Lynn Slater) (11/18/88)
In the past week, there have been several discussions on the "friendlyness" of certain vendor specific interfaces, particularly that from Verdix. Those unhappy with these interfaces might want to try the Emacs Ada support package as it offers a simple interface that is directed toward rapid program development. The interface is much like that used for C development and will probably be extended to multiple vendors. -- Lynn =============================================================== Lynn Slater -- lrs@esl.com ESL/TRW 495 Java Drive, Box 3510, Sunnyvale, Ca 94088-3510 Office (408) 738-2888 x 4482; Home (415) 796-4149 ===============================================================