Re: System calls - GNAT library vs. direct bindings

[Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>]

On 1 Cze, 08:59, a...@anon.org (anon) wrote:

> One factor is that Ada was designed for portability there if you do not care
> about portability then do not use Ada!

I don't understand. Does it mean that Ada is such a crap that if
portability is not an issue than the only things that remain in the
language are disadvantages?
What other language would you recommend then?

> Wrappers defeat the purpose of use Ada, so do not use them!

Most libraries for Ada are wrappers for something.

> Performance -- use the OS's core language.

Why should that be any different?
>From the point of view of client application, OS is just API. With
some calling convention. It doesn't really matter what is a "core
language" there, it might be even assembler.
The only thing that *does* matter is that to achieve ultimate
performance with OS' services, one usually needs direct access to this
API.

> But as the
> performance of the code goes up the maintainability starts to drop.

You must be coming from some strange place.

> This is due to the fact that performance alorithms are normally tied to
> the hardware and as hardware is update the alorithms may need to be
> rewritten just to maintain current performance levels which increases
> the maintainability cost.

Yes. You are coming from some strange place.

--
Maciej Sobczak
http://www.msobczak.com/