Re: Any way of persuading GNAT/GCC to implement a true overlay and not a pointer?
- From: Justin Gombos <rpbkbq.xax.gld@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 01:42:07 GMT
On 2006-04-04, Randy Brukardt <randy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Expecting unusual requirements to be handled for free on important
projects is just plain silly.
The best support is often free. I see no issue with the OP using this
forum as a starting point.
In fact, it would be beyond silly to start up a support contract for a
single issue, risking the possibility that the paid support can't help
anyway, when the issue could potentially be answered in a public forum
at no cost.
The OP came to the right place. If the forum fails to help, he still
has the option of buying support.
--
PM instructions: do a C4esar Ciph3r on my address; retain punctuation.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Any way of persuading GNAT/GCC to implement a true overlay and not a pointer?
- From: Randy Brukardt
- Re: Any way of persuading GNAT/GCC to implement a true overlay and not a pointer?
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Palatable Windows IO using Ada
- Next by Date: Re: Palatable Windows IO using Ada
- Previous by thread: Re: Any way of persuading GNAT/GCC to implement a true overlay and not a pointer?
- Next by thread: Re: Any way of persuading GNAT/GCC to implement a true overlay and not a pointer?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
