GNAT packages in Linux distributions
in [ADA]
|
From: Stephen Leake on 10 May 2010 05:41 "Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene(a)yahoo.fr> writes: > Le Sun, 09 May 2010 23:26:10 +0200, Ludovic Brenta > <ludovic(a)ludovic-brenta.org> a écrit: >>> Whatever reasons might be, they aren't good. (:-() >> >> Oh no? What about top-secret Ada code from the military that triggers a >> bug in GNAT? > Yes, every one can understand that and probably did think about that > while reading your words. However, a patch does not expose any private > data, unless you claim some details all over the worlds. > > I'm pretty sure this is more a matter of GPL vs Pro than a matter of > privacy (what privacy may be violated with a bug correction ?) The bug database includes the code that triggers the bug. It might be possible to expose only the fixes to public purview, but even the descriptions of the bug might contain some private information. It would take a lot of manual effort to present a "clean" public view. I'd rather AdaCore spend that effort on improving the tools. -- -- Stephe
From: Ludovic Brenta on 10 May 2010 05:46 Stephen Leake <stephen_leake(a)stephe-leake.org> writes: > "Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene(a)yahoo.fr> writes: > >> Le Sun, 09 May 2010 23:26:10 +0200, Ludovic Brenta >> <ludovic(a)ludovic-brenta.org> a écrit: >>>> Whatever reasons might be, they aren't good. (:-() >>> >>> Oh no? What about top-secret Ada code from the military that triggers a >>> bug in GNAT? >> Yes, every one can understand that and probably did think about that >> while reading your words. However, a patch does not expose any private >> data, unless you claim some details all over the worlds. >> >> I'm pretty sure this is more a matter of GPL vs Pro than a matter of >> privacy (what privacy may be violated with a bug correction ?) > > The bug database includes the code that triggers the bug. > > It might be possible to expose only the fixes to public purview, but > even the descriptions of the bug might contain some private information. > It would take a lot of manual effort to present a "clean" public view. > I'd rather AdaCore spend that effort on improving the tools. Actually, the fixes *are* exposed to public purview. This happens when AdaCore merge their fixes into GCC. Each patch appears as a self-contained email on the gcc-patches mailing list, complete with a technical description of the bug and even the AdaCore bug number; only, we don't know what triggered the bug, so it is difficult to relate the technical description to a publicly known bug trigger. -- Ludovic Brenta.
From: sjw on 10 May 2010 10:29 On May 10, 10:46 am, Ludovic Brenta <ludo...(a)ludovic-brenta.org> wrote: > Actually, the fixes *are* exposed to public purview. This happens when > AdaCore merge their fixes into GCC. Each patch appears as a > self-contained email on the gcc-patches mailing list, complete with a > technical description of the bug and even the AdaCore bug number; only, > we don't know what triggered the bug, so it is difficult to relate the > technical description to a publicly known bug trigger. I haven't seen any of these (I guess I joined that list between merges) but presumably the test suite does get updated (as with changes for other languages).
From: Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) on 10 May 2010 14:45 Le Mon, 10 May 2010 10:02:45 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox(a)dmitry-kazakov.de> a écrit: > Maybe FSF will gain in 1-2 years, but then Ada 2012 will appear, breaking > it again. Yes, it happens I'm thinking about that trouble, as I'm waiting for long for the Programing By Contract (tm) capabilities (I use to be an Eiffel advocator for some times in the past). As I'm pretty sure they will not be support for that in the GCC or MinGW version, I was thinking I will probably go for a fall-back : just modify the actual version so that it will at least accept the syntax, so as to be able to write these pre- and post-conditions for documentation purpose. There will be not check at runtime (should be nice to ensure validity of expressions contained in the pre- and post- by the way), but this will at least allow to write it (a fall-back, as I said). 2012 in very close... -- No-no, this isn't an oops ...or I hope (TM) - Don't blame me... I'm just not lucky
From: Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57) on 10 May 2010 14:47
Le Mon, 10 May 2010 11:41:50 +0200, Stephen Leake <stephen_leake(a)stephe-leake.org> a écrit: > The bug database includes the code that triggers the bug. I didn't knew this was mandatory (now I know) -- No-no, this isn't an oops ...or I hope (TM) - Don't blame me... I'm just not lucky |