From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 12 Feb 93 21:05:53 GMT
From: agate!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!darwin.sur
a.net!mlb.semi.harris.com!dw3g!smccoy@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Scott McCoy)
Subject: Re: Public Release of AdaSAGE (Re: Why is the DOE selling AdaSage?)
Message-ID: <1993Feb12.210553.19700@mlb.semi.harris.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1993Feb12.173406.8810@beaver.cs.washington.edu>,
drupp@cs.washington.edu (Douglas Rupp) writes:
|> There is
|> no good reason for a system such as AdaSage to require a different
|> version
|> for every platform/vendor.
|> 

It is more accurate to think of AdaSage as an application-development
toolkit, rather than a set of libraries.  AdaSage includes Thor,
which supports both screen and database accesses (and maybe reports
-- but it's been awhile since I did work with AdaSage).

So, I can see why they have different versions, depending on the
platform.

I'm not saying AdaSage is a good or bad tool, nor am I passing judgement
on the portability of the applications developed using AdaSage.

-- 
Scott McCoy	Harris ISD	Opinions expressed are my own.
Staff Eng - SW	Internet: 	smccoy@dw3g.ess.harris.com