Re: Binding or not binding

["Jeffrey R. Carter" <jrcarter@acm.org>]

Ali Bendriss wrote:
> 
> I would like to have your opinion about the best way to go in the future, 
> and in particular if binding a C library is really the way to go.
>   
> When we talk about reuse does it mean reusing the libraries done in an other 
> language ? 
> Re-implementing zlib in Ada for example. Is it a waist of time ?
> How to choose ? where to start writing in Ada ?

As others have said, there's no single answer.

Bindings are quicker and cheaper, so that's often the reason bindings 
are used. There's also the valid argument that one should not duplicate 
the effort that's already gone into the library in another language. So 
those are arguments for a binding.

Both bindings and Ada versions have to be modified when the original 
version changes, so that's probably not a major issue, but modifying a 
binding may be easier than modifying an Ada version.

On the other hand, Ada has tasking, and libraries in other languages 
don't take tasking into account, so an Ada version can be designed to 
handle tasking, sometimes better than a thick binding can. Added to the 
impression that languages with extensive native libraries are better, 
those are arguments for an Ada version.

So you need to consider how much effort you're willing to put into the 
matter, both upfront and in the future, and how well the existing 
library meets your needs, and make your choice accordingly.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Alms for an ex-leper!"
Monty Python's Life of Brian
75