3 ms·
>> The defect that is most universally accepted is that it is too verbose. Another huge barrier (especially to early adoption) was the cost of Ada toolchains.
by thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
>> The defect that is most universally accepted is that it is too verbose.
Another huge barrier (especially to early adoption) was the cost of Ada toolchains.
Even today, there are proprietary Ada implementations that cost thousands of dollars per seat.
- Jtsummers 5y agoThere are also C and C++ toolchains that cost similar amounts (if you want to use them for safety critical systems). But they do have more free or open source options than Ada does. Fortunately FSF GNAT is free and unencumbered (unlike AdaCore's release of GNAT GPL).
- CRConrad 5y ago> But they do have more free or open source options than Ada does. Fortunately FSF GNAT is free and unencumbered (unlike AdaCore's release of GNAT GPL). Sorry, I don't quite get what you're trying to say here. You mean unencumbered by being free or open source?
- Jtsummers 5y agoGNAT GPL removes the runtime exception, so if you build something with it linked to its standard library, it's also supposed to be open sourced. This means you can't (in a legal/technical sense, not a true prohibitive sense) make closed source software with it. FSF GNAT doesn't remove that exception, so it can be used in releasing closed source software. That's the encumbrance that GNAT GPL imposes and FSF GNAT does not.
- CRConrad 5y agoGot it, thanks!