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: 11 Jun 93 19:38:57 GMT
From: aio!pat.mdc.com!yow@ames.arc.nasa.gov  (Bill Yow)
Subject: Re: MS-Windows compiler review and Ada 'myopia'
Message-ID: <1993Jun11.193857.21055@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <EMERY.93Jun11090948@goldfinger.mitre.org>, emery@goldfinger.mitre.o
rg (David Emery) writes:
|> The latest issue of IEEE Computer (June 93, pp 108-111) has a review
|> of two Ada compilers (Meridian and Janus).  The author, Frank Pappas,
|> complained about the Windows API thin bindings included with the two
|> compilers.  He said, "...I think it was a mistake for [the compiler
|> vendors] to hav deefined their own interfaces.  What's needed is a
|> common, high-level Ada binding for Windows,

No No No,  We need a common high-level binding to a generic windowing system.

That way, if I write UI code to that binding it works on Windows, X or whatever
else comes down the road.  This can also hide different vendor's low level
bindings to Windows or X.

And yes the Windows 3.x bindings are very ugly!

Anybody intrested in such a binding? 

                                                Later,
                                                Bill Yow
                                                (713) 280-1591
                                                yow@pat.mdc.com
                                                byow@mcimail.com

My opinions are my own!