From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
To: David Starner <dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org>
Cc: Richard Kenner <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, rms@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Why not gnat Ada in gcc? 
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 18:21:00 -0000
Message-id: <14729.973131786@upchuck>
References: <20001101200846.A28532@x8b4e516e.dhcp.okstate.edu>
X-SW-Source: 2000-11/msg00055.html

  In message < 20001101200846.A28532@x8b4e516e.dhcp.okstate.edu >you write:
  > On Wed, Nov 01, 2000 at 08:54:07PM -0500, Richard Kenner wrote:
  > > Yes, but again, this is only relevent if there *are* a set of "GNU Ada
  > > developers".  I don't see any evidence of such a group at this point.
  > > Sure, when the sources are in the GCC tree, it will encourage such,
  > > but I don't expect that to make any difference whatsoever.
  > > 
  > > Are you aware of any GNU Ada developers "in the wings" out there?
  > 
  > There's always the GNAT for DOS people.
And the GNAT for Linux folks.
jeff