Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!neat.cs.toronto.edu!omicron.cs.fsu.edu!fsucs.cs.fsu.edu!peterson
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
From: peterson@fsucs.cs.fsu.edu (Eric J Peterson)
Subject: Re: Any ADA compilers available?
Message-ID: <9002050356.AA22489@fsucs.cs.fsu.edu>
Reply-To: peterson@nu.cs.fsu.edu (Eric J Peterson)
Organization: Florida State University Computer Science Department
References: <1367@crash.cts.com> <816@cs.nps.navy.mil>
Date: 5 Feb 90 03:55:42 GMT
Lines: 28

In article <816@cs.nps.navy.mil>, schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) writes:
| Since the language name Ada
| is trademarked, you must get DoD validation or you can't call it Ada.  

I read a few months ago in an issue of ACM's SIGPLAN that the AJPO was
going to allow the trademark on the name "Ada" to expire without renewing
it, although there was no mention of why this was happening.  Is this true?
If so, why?

| As a reference point, the IntegrAda compiler for MS-DOS machines
| takes up about 2 megabytes of disk space and requires 640K of memory to run.

Here at FSU, we have the Janus Ada compiler for MS-DOS machines which takes
up about 3 megs of disk space and a full 640K of RAM to run -- it doesn't
even leave enough memory to run our networking software.  And you need a
386 of at least 20 MHz to get any reasonable speed out of the compiler.
What kind of performance can we expect of an Amiga Ada compiler in
comparison?

| Jeff Schweiger

Eric

-- 
  Eric J. Peterson <> peterson@nu.cs.fsu.edu <> uunet!nu.cs.fsu.edu!peterson
Florida State Univ * CS Systems Support Group * Room 011 Love * (904) 644-2296
       echo "This is not a pipe." | lpr -P laserjet; more ~/.disclaimer