Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Simon Clubley]

With the change in license for GtkAda, I have started looking for Ada
bindings for other GUI toolkits that run under Linux.

At:

http://www.adapower.com/index.php?Command=Class&ClassID=AdaGUI&Title=Ada+GUI

there is a list of known bindings and only the base X11 and Motif interfaces
appear to have Ada bindings for Linux. (GWindows appears to be MS-Windows
only).

Are any other Ada open source bindings to current Linux based GUI toolkits
available ?

Thanks for any information,

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
If Google's motto is "don't be evil", then how did we get Google Groups 2 ?

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Marius Amado-Alves]

The information that we collected here some time ago might still be  
helpful:

http://www.liacc.up.pt/cgi-bin/casbah/casbah.cgi? 
operation=view&pagename=GUIs_For_Ada

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Simon Wright]

clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley) writes:

> Are any other Ada open source bindings to current Linux based GUI
> toolkits available ?

http://tcladashell.sourceforge.net/ (no downloadable distribution as
yet, checkout via anoncvs or follow the links to Terry Westley's
original site).

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[M E Leypold]

clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley) writes:

> With the change in license for GtkAda, I have started looking for Ada

Which isn't far from clear yet, let me emphasize this. On the other
side I understand everyon very well who'll be looking for alternatives
now, since, due to the really small community it seems doubtful that the
community will able to maintain the last GMGPL version of GtkAda.

> bindings for other GUI toolkits that run under Linux.
> 
> At:
> 
> http://www.adapower.com/index.php?Command=Class&ClassID=AdaGUI&Title=Ada+GUI
> 
> there is a list of known bindings and only the base X11 and Motif interfaces
> appear to have Ada bindings for Linux. (GWindows appears to be MS-Windows
> only).

Tash has a binding to Tk (and embedded TCL ...). I've to thank Simon
Wright for having pointed me to Tash in the recent GtkAda debate.

> Are any other Ada open source bindings to current Linux based GUI toolkits
> available ?

Since Gtk, Pango and Cairo are the future of open source GUI
development -- they are at any point in time in a rather sorry state
as far as the code is concerned but move forward with astonishing
speed and adress many issues other toolkits neglected (accessability,
for instance), I can only recommend staying with Gtk.

In the case of Ada that means in my eyes that Ada just missed train
and cannot be counted under the main stream open source languages any
more. This has nothing to do with technical merits (which are high)
but with purely practical considerations.

Also learning Gtk (any GUI Toolkit) well is hard. One probably would
like to preserve one's investment in that area, so moving to another
language (and staying with Gtk) is a definite option. My
recommendation at that point for lovers of excotic languages would be
Ocaml :-), but YMMV.

OK, I've been crying "Jehova" now. I know, this is comp.lang.ada and
all, but realistically, moving away from Ada is always an alternative
if one is missing support libraries.

Regards -- Markus

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Gautier]

M E Leypold:

> In the case of Ada that means in my eyes that Ada just missed train
> and cannot be counted under the main stream open source languages any
> more. This has nothing to do with technical merits (which are high)
> but with purely practical considerations.

- Are you supposing that Ada has ever been a main stream language ?

- In the software world, it is no problem to miss some trains, there
   is always a new train after. If needed, you can invent the train
   yourself, do a good marketing and pretend it is the first train
   ever. Ask Bill Gates for some success stories in that respect!

Cheers, Gautier
______________________________________________________________
Ada programming -- http://www.mysunrise.ch/users/gdm/gsoft.htm

NB: For a direct answer, e-mail address on the Web site!

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Simon Clubley]

In article <d63bdlwuy3.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>, M E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de> writes:
> 
> Also learning Gtk (any GUI Toolkit) well is hard. One probably would
> like to preserve one's investment in that area, so moving to another
> language (and staying with Gtk) is a definite option. My
> recommendation at that point for lovers of excotic languages would be
> Ocaml :-), but YMMV.
> 

I was thinking about this over the weekend and have now come to the same
conclusion, but I would like to thank people for their pointers to Ada
bindings to other toolkits anyway.

My current GtkAda programs tend to be things like microcontroller
programmers/debuggers or status monitors for things (like a current
autonomous robot experiment) that do need Ada. Neither of those GUI
applications really require Ada (the robot has to handle the status
monitor link potentially failing for reasons unrelated to the code
in the status monitor anyway), and I've spent quite a bit of time learning
the GTK toolkit.

You are correct about this affecting hobbyist users. The above projects
(and others) are hobbyist projects, but since I don't know what I will
do with this (and other) projects in the future, I would like to be in
control of how I use my code.

I think that the most annoying thing is that GtkAda started out life as
GMGPL[1] before been changed to pure GPL and then impacting all the projects
built up until then. If it had been GPL at the start, then that would have
been known _before_ designing and writing any code.

Simon.

[1] It most definitely started out life as GMGPL. From the GtkAda mailing
lists:

    http://lists.adacore.com/pipermail/gtkada/2002-February/001204.html

    Arnaud Charlet
    Sun, 10 Feb 2002 00:38:36 +0100 

    GtkAda is licensed under the GNAT modified GPL (see the GtkAda spec files
    more the exact wording). So basically you should be fine, but that being
    said, whether you can use it in such or such exact
    conditions would require to examine all the licenses involved or to hire
    a lawyer to do this job for you.

    Arno

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
If Google's motto is "don't be evil", then how did we get Google Groups 2 ?

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Jeffrey R. Carter]

Simon Clubley wrote:
> 
> I think that the most annoying thing is that GtkAda started out life as
> GMGPL[1] before been changed to pure GPL and then impacting all the projects
> built up until then. If it had been GPL at the start, then that would have
> been known _before_ designing and writing any code.

There is no impact on projects that use a GMGPL version of GtkAda. If 
you got a GMGPL version and you stick with it, you still have a GMGPL 
version.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time."
Monty Python & the Holy Grail
07

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[M E Leypold]

"Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.not.jrcarter@acm.not.spam.org> writes:

> Simon Clubley wrote:
> > I think that the most annoying thing is that GtkAda started out life
> > as
> > GMGPL[1] before been changed to pure GPL and then impacting all the projects
> > built up until then. If it had been GPL at the start, then that would have
> > been known _before_ designing and writing any code.
> 
> There is no impact on projects that use a GMGPL version of GtkAda. If
> you got a GMGPL version and you stick with it, you still have a GMGPL
> version.


The GMGPL interested community would have to maintain (i.e. bugfix and
conservatively extend) the GMGPL version for the next years. Is it big
enough?

Regards -- Markus

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Ludovic Brenta]

M E Leypold wrote :
> The GMGPL interested community would have to maintain (i.e. bugfix and
> conservatively extend) the GMGPL version for the next years.

The number 1 requirement, as far as Debian is concerned, is that GtkAda
must be suitable for supporting GPS.

GtkAda >= 2.4.0 is fine with GPS 2.1 (this is in Sarge).
GtkAda >= 2.8.1 seems to be fine with GPS 4.0.0 (this is the plan for
Etch).

Notably, GtkAda 2.4.0 would NOT be enough for GPS 4.0.0.

Just a data point.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Simon Wright]

"Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:

> The number 1 requirement, as far as Debian is concerned, is that
> GtkAda must be suitable for supporting GPS.

Which of course doesn't require GMGPL. (I expect this has been said
already, but ..)

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Ludovic Brenta]

Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org> writes:

> "Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:
>
>> The number 1 requirement, as far as Debian is concerned, is that
>> GtkAda must be suitable for supporting GPS.
>
> Which of course doesn't require GMGPL. (I expect this has been said
> already, but ..)

No, but it implies that it may be impractical to support a GMGPL
version (namely 2.4.0) of GtkAda in Debian.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Michael Bode]

Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:

> No, but it implies that it may be impractical to support a GMGPL
> version (namely 2.4.0) of GtkAda in Debian.

And then there is that interpretation on c.l.a that a GMGPL package can
according to its file headers only be redistributed under GPL.

Of course there is another interpretation which says the file headers
are irrelevant. 

Not to forget GPL saying you shall put a reference to GPL into the
file headers.

Maybe it's simpler to stay with a microsoftese EULA?

-- 
Michael Bode

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[M E Leypold]

Michael Bode <m.g.bode@web.de> writes:

> Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:
> 
> > No, but it implies that it may be impractical to support a GMGPL
> > version (namely 2.4.0) of GtkAda in Debian.
> 
> And then there is that interpretation on c.l.a that a GMGPL package can
> according to its file headers only be redistributed under GPL.

Which is, forgive me, complete nonsense. 

> Of course there is another interpretation which says the file headers
> are irrelevant. 

Which is (IANAL) also nonsense the longer I think about it, and was,
after all, only a rumour about s.th. Robert Dewar is supposed to have
said at FOSDEM. It is in accordance with whatever scant messages do
reach us from AdaCore though -- every explicit question about why the
file headers are as they are and what that implies about the copyright
of the single files has been been met by rather evasive answers so
far.

> Not to forget GPL saying you shall put a reference to GPL into the
> file headers.

Yes, it will be intresting to see what the FSF has to say about this.

> Maybe it's simpler to stay with a microsoftese EULA?

But certainly: "All your rights are belong to us". In a sense that is
simple. 

The unfortunate thing is, that (regardless of what the answers to the
licensing status of the source in question will finally be) the
current practice of AdaCore (just to pretend the license notices in
the source don't exist), if left unchecked, will devalue any current
practice of free software distribution and take any assurance /
plausibility about the license status of free software from us. 

So we are rapidly approaching the same kind of simplicity here: "Just
ask the licensor, no, we can't put anything in writing" (Usually
accompanied by an important now-we-are-a-business noise, as if that
wouldn't just make it even worse instead of better). Licenses will
change with the phase of the moon then, or at least could.

Regards -- Markus

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[M E Leypold]

"Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:

> M E Leypold wrote :
> > The GMGPL interested community would have to maintain (i.e. bugfix and
> > conservatively extend) the GMGPL version for the next years.
> 
> The number 1 requirement, as far as Debian is concerned, is that GtkAda
> must be suitable for supporting GPS.
> 
> GtkAda >= 2.4.0 is fine with GPS 2.1 (this is in Sarge).
> GtkAda >= 2.8.1 seems to be fine with GPS 4.0.0 (this is the plan for
> Etch).
> 
> Notably, GtkAda 2.4.0 would NOT be enough for GPS 4.0.0.
> 
> Just a data point.

OK, I understand this. I've not been talking about Debian only, though.

What annoys me most with this situation that anybody intrested in
maintaining a GMGPL branch of GtkAda is now almost 2 years behind,
just because AdaCore could not me bothered to document the supposed
license (or its change).

Regards -- Markus

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Jeffrey R. Carter]

M E Leypold wrote:
> 
> The GMGPL interested community would have to maintain (i.e. bugfix and
> conservatively extend) the GMGPL version for the next years. Is it big
> enough?

Or else live with the last GMGPL version.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"C's solution to this [variable-sized array parameters] has real problems,
and people who are complaining about safety definitely have a point."
Dennis Ritchie
25

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[M E Leypold]

"Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.not.jrcarter@acm.not.spam.org> writes:

> M E Leypold wrote:
> > The GMGPL interested community would have to maintain (i.e. bugfix
> > and
> > conservatively extend) the GMGPL version for the next years. Is it big
> > enough?
> 
> Or else live with the last GMGPL version.

"Live with" without the option of conservative maintenance sounds
pretty much like a dead end. One reason to decide for the main stream
(Gtk) is the continued developement, in backend and interface. Writing
now a software based on something that will become more and more
unbuildable within the next years seems to be a waste of time. 

Personally I never ever build infrastructure on something that is not
maintained any more or doesn't have community debugging
it. Considering all the answers that I got on the bugs in Gnat 3.15p
(which is after all in current Debian) that told me, that 3.15p is
dead dead dead, I can imagine what answers anyone will get (here in
c.l.a) when asking about GtkAda 2.4.0 problems in some months: It will
go like this:

  - "Got problem with GtkAda 2.4.0 [...] "

  - "Oh man / good grief, that has been fixed looong ago. Just use a current GtkAda."

  - "There is no newer GMGPL GtkAda"

  - "The new version is GPL, just take that?"

  - "Cant't use GPL"

  - "Why not?"

  - "I, want to link closed source."

  - "Just buy support or free your software! You wouldn't want to
    restrict the freedom of your cusomers?"

  - "But ..."


From there the discussion quickly spins out of control, without
actually addressing the initial technical problem again.

Mind you, that I'm not reproaching anyone that the recent discussions
went like they went. They were rather instructive to me. But the
thought experiment "What will I do when I think I found a bug in an
already dusty version?" should make clear, that using an old version
will not really be fun.

Regards -- Markus

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Jeffrey R. Carter]

M E Leypold wrote:
> 
> "Live with" without the option of conservative maintenance sounds
> pretty much like a dead end. One reason to decide for the main stream
> (Gtk) is the continued developement, in backend and interface. Writing
> now a software based on something that will become more and more
> unbuildable within the next years seems to be a waste of time. 

A fairly common practice on real projects is to choose a toolset and 
freeze it for the life of the project. Such projects "live with" 
whatever drawbacks their chosen toolset may have. So, living with an 
older toolset is not that uncommon a situation.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"C++ is like jamming a helicopter inside a Miata
and expecting some sort of improvement."
Drew Olbrich
51

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[M E Leypold]

"Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.not.jrcarter@acm.not.spam.org> writes:

> M E Leypold wrote:
> > "Live with" without the option of conservative maintenance sounds
> > pretty much like a dead end. One reason to decide for the main stream
> > (Gtk) is the continued developement, in backend and interface. Writing
> > now a software based on something that will become more and more
> > unbuildable within the next years seems to be a waste of time.
> 
> A fairly common practice on real projects is to choose a toolset and
> freeze it for the life of the project. Such projects "live with"
> whatever drawbacks their chosen toolset may have. So, living with an
> older toolset is not that uncommon a situation.

Right. That's why I use Gnat 3.15p :-)). 

Freezing the tool set is OK for a single projekt. But I think it's
useless to build a general code base (like, say, additional widget
sets which one would like to reuse in future projects) on a foundation
which will not be there (maintained) for some years.

Regards -- Markus

Re: Ada bindings to Linux GUI toolkits ?

[Lucretia]

Simon Clubley wrote:

[snip]

> Are any other Ada open source bindings to current Linux based GUI toolkits
> available ?

Well, I have some source that I'm in the process (slowly) of making
available. It's not complete but does work. There needs to be a lot of
work done on it, especially on the C++ virtual functions.

You can keep an eye on it here:

http://wxada.tigris.org
http://wxada.tigris.org/screenshots.html

Luke.