object Ada

object Ada

[Wasiq Hasan]

hi i just got ObjectAda from thomson software.
Is there ant refrence material for it?

I want to call win32 api to read data from
rs-232. do I need a vxd or i can just call
the api?

i'm using win95. 

anybody has any example.

thanks

Wasiq

Re: object Ada

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <5c08vk$ame@ultra.exodus.net>, whasan@cyberoffice.com (Wasiq Hasan) writes:
> hi i just got ObjectAda from thomson software.
> Is there ant refrence material for it?

For $ 30, the vendor will send you a draft version of their
documentation intended for the next version.  They have been
suitably chastised in this newsgroup about failing to include
hardcopy documentation with V7.0 but apparently there was a
time-to-market issue.  That is above and beyond any ambiguity
regarding what name they should put on the documentation since
between V7.0 and the future V7.1 they have changed their name
from Thomson Software to Aonix.

> I want to call win32 api to read data from
> rs-232. do I need a vxd or i can just call
> the api?

Every ObjectAda for Windows package from the Personal Edition
on up includes Win32 bindings, so you can call the Win32 API
from the compiler.

> i'm using win95. 

I don't know whether the ability to call the Win32 API is
sufficient to access an RS-232 port or whether a VXD must
be interposed, but if there is a problem in that area it
would seem to be the fault of Microsoft rather than Aonix.
With luck, even as I prattle on, a more helpful answer is
being composed by someone who actually understands all the
workings of Windows 95.

Larry Kilgallen

Re: object Ada

[Dave Wood]

Wasiq Hasan wrote:
> 
> hi i just got ObjectAda from thomson software.
> Is there ant refrence material for it?
> 
> I want to call win32 api to read data from
> rs-232. do I need a vxd or i can just call
> the api?
> 
> i'm using win95.
> 
> anybody has any example.
> 
> thanks
> 
> Wasiq

Unlike Windows 3.1, Windows NT does not allow INT21 or BIOS 
access to the communication ports; if such access is required, 
the DDK should be used to develop a driver to carry out the 
function.  That being said, the communication ports can be 
opened and used via the CreateFile, ReadFile and WriteFile 
API calls. The following functions are also available for 
use with communications devices.

    BuildCommDCB
    BuildCommDCBAndTimeouts
    ClearCommBreak
    ClearCommError
    CommConfigDialog
    DeviceIoControl
    EscapeCommFunction
    GetCommConfig
    GetCommMask
    GetCommModemStatus
    GetCommProperties
    GetCommState
    GetCommTimeouts
    GetDefaultCommConfig
    PurgeComm
    SetCommBreak
    SetCommConfig
    SetCommMask
    SetCommState
    SetCommTimeouts
    SetDefaultCommConfig
    SetupComm
    TransmitCommChar
    WaitCommEvent

For further details, consult the appropriate Microsoft 
documentation.


-- Dave Wood
-- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
-- Aonix - "Ada with an Attitude"

Re: object Ada

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:06:05 GMT, in 32 wonderful lines,
kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) said:

>That is above and beyond any ambiguity
>regarding what name they should put on the documentation since
>between V7.0 and the future V7.1 they have changed their name
>from Thomson Software to Aonix.

Do you know when is that V7.1 scheduled to appear? I've just ordered
7.0 Professional and my local distributor said me: a) There wasn't any
new version in the works (at least, to appear soon), and b) The money
I'm paying *doesn't* include an upgrade option, so I'll have to pay
again full price for next release. So I'd feel very cheated if that
V7.1 you're mentioning were to appear in just a month or three.

(BTW, I'm not trying to accuse my distributor of unfairness, but, as I
made them clear, I think paying $750 and not having an upgrade path to
new releases is a hard pill to swallow.)

						  /L/e/k/t/u

Re: object Ada

[Craig E. Ransom]

Wasiq:

<< I want to call win32 api to read data from
rs-232. do I need a vxd or i can just call
the api? >>

You should be able to just call the Windows API calls directly.  You 
will have to create the appropriate record (struct) for the serial 
device, but after that there should be no really difficult technical 
issues.

I assume you have some references dealing with the Win95 API.

-- Craig (The Data Ferret 8:>)
Janus/Ada 83; Janus/Ada 95; JAWS & CLAW; AppletMagic
Using Virtual Access 3.52 build 159c (32-bit) Win95

Re: object Ada

[Jerry Petrey]

Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> 
> Do you know when is that V7.1 scheduled to appear? I've just ordered
> 7.0 Professional and my local distributor said me: a) There wasn't any
> new version in the works (at least, to appear soon), and b) The money
> I'm paying *doesn't* include an upgrade option, so I'll have to pay
> again full price for next release. So I'd feel very cheated if that
> V7.1 you're mentioning were to appear in just a month or three.
> 
> (BTW, I'm not trying to accuse my distributor of unfairness, but, as I
> made them clear, I think paying $750 and not having an upgrade path to
> new releases is a hard pill to swallow.)
> 
>                                                   /L/e/k/t/u

Aonix told me last week that 7.1 is nearing release.  Should be within
a couple of months.  If I were you, I'd find another distributor.
And you should get on their yearly maintenance program where you
get all the updates free.  In any case, I would think that if a new 
version came out shortly after you purchased one, you would be offered
the update at little or no charge - they can't expect to be successful
if they don't do that.

-- 
=====================================================================
== Jerry Petrey                                                    ==
== Consultant Software Engineer - Member Team Ada and Team Forth   ==
==            Rockwell Collins Commercial Avionics Group           ==
==            Melbourne, FL   email: gdp@mlb.cca.rockwell.com      ==
=====================================================================

Re: object Ada

[Kevin Radke]

In article <32ecf0ca.12593582@news.lander.es>, lektu@lander.es (Juanma
Barranquero) wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:06:05 GMT, in 32 wonderful lines,
> kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) said:
> 
> >That is above and beyond any ambiguity
> >regarding what name they should put on the documentation since
> >between V7.0 and the future V7.1 they have changed their name
> >from Thomson Software to Aonix.
> 
> Do you know when is that V7.1 scheduled to appear? I've just ordered
> 7.0 Professional and my local distributor said me: a) There wasn't any
> new version in the works (at least, to appear soon), and b) The money
> I'm paying *doesn't* include an upgrade option, so I'll have to pay
> again full price for next release. So I'd feel very cheated if that
> V7.1 you're mentioning were to appear in just a month or three.
> 
> (BTW, I'm not trying to accuse my distributor of unfairness, but, as I
> made them clear, I think paying $750 and not having an upgrade path to
> new releases is a hard pill to swallow.)

The "second" patch to v7.0 is available on the aonix website.  See:
http://www.aonix.com/Support/ada_index.html

(I'm sure aonix support would have told you this anyway...)

Kevin

-- 
/\/\Under Construction/\/\ kmradke@inav.net

Re: object Ada

[Jon S Anthony]

In article <32FB8031.18D@ccis.adisys.com.au> Steve Gibson <gibson@ccis.adisys.com.au> writes:

> Jon S Anthony wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > ????  What's wrong with the Intermetrics X11/Motif bindings for Ada95.
> > I think these things are even up for "ACE" adoption.
> 
> 
> We made some attempt to compile the Intermetrics X bindings with
> ObjectAdaV7.0 on HP-UX10.10. Had a significant number of problems not to
> make it worthwhile. In any case the bindings, so I'm told, are
> significantly different to what we currently use. (since we are porting
> our 83 code, that's important). Passed the problem back to the vendor,
> and was told Aonix tried the same and had the same problems. As far as I
> know, the Intermetrics X bindings were dropped, Aonix will be shipping
> the AXI bindings, good news for me since I'm told they are identical to
> the bindings we use for our Ada83 code.

This is big time bad news.  These bindings should be pretty much
standard Ada95 and so should go through anything supporting the
Interfaces.C hierarchy.  Admittedely I have not looked that closely at
them and have not had the need yet to use themm under ObjectAda.  But,
having Aonix moving over to this AXI binding is a disaster in the
making.  Why?  Simple: Begins again a myriad set of incompatible
bindings from a number of sources.  Ada95 can solve this problem and
there is no reason why there should be more than one of these
bindings.  It _may_ make some sense to have one _thin_ binding and one
_thick_ binding (I'm not even convinced of this - there should be
_one_ _thin_ binding and that's it).  Having more than one after all
the past lessons "learned" from how _bad_ this is, at this point,
absolutely INSANE.  It would just be a reason for potential new users
to _not_ use Ada.

So, ACE members - what's the deal here?

/Jon
-- 
Jon Anthony
Organon Motives, Inc.
Belmont, MA 02178
617.484.3383
jsa@organon.com

Re: object Ada

[Oliver E. Cole]

   The Intermetrics bindings are currently up for ACE adoption.  They
are thin, on purpose.  Thin bindings need less documentation, as the 
original documentation can be re-used.  

   ACE approved bindings are portable across Ada95 compilers.  As Ada95
compilers get more mature, some things get caught that require
changes to be made, but over time, they will become more stable.  Many
people are already using the Intermetric Motif bindings successfully, 
so such problems as these are isolated in the ACE experience.

   As soon as the ACE (and the ARA) endorses these bindings, they will
be maintained and CM'd a little more aggressively.  I myself would
like things to move faster, but for some rason, I don't always get
my way :-)

   Note that there is no committment from the ARA members to drop
other bindings.  As the post indicates, others bindings may
be used by particular vendors as well, perhaps to support
backwards compatability.

--oec

Jon S Anthony (jsa@alexandria) wrote:
: In article <32FB8031.18D@ccis.adisys.com.au> Steve Gibson <gibson@ccis.adisys.com.au> writes:

: > Jon S Anthony wrote:
: > > 
: > > 
: > > ????  What's wrong with the Intermetrics X11/Motif bindings for Ada95.
: > > I think these things are even up for "ACE" adoption.
: > 
: > 
: > We made some attempt to compile the Intermetrics X bindings with
: > ObjectAdaV7.0 on HP-UX10.10. Had a significant number of problems not to
: > make it worthwhile. In any case the bindings, so I'm told, are
: > significantly different to what we currently use. (since we are porting
: > our 83 code, that's important). Passed the problem back to the vendor,

  [snip]

: This is big time bad news.  These bindings should be pretty much
: standard Ada95 and so should go through anything supporting the
: Interfaces.C hierarchy.  Admittedely I have not looked that closely at
: them and have not had the need yet to use themm under ObjectAda.  But,
: having Aonix moving over to this AXI binding is a disaster in the
: making.  Why?  Simple: Begins again a myriad set of incompatible
: bindings from a number of sources.  Ada95 can solve this problem and
: there is no reason why there should be more than one of these
: bindings.  It _may_ make some sense to have one _thin_ binding and one
: _thick_ binding (I'm not even convinced of this - there should be
: _one_ _thin_ binding and that's it).  Having more than one after all
: the past lessons "learned" from how _bad_ this is, at this point,
: absolutely INSANE.  It would just be a reason for potential new users
: to _not_ use Ada.

: So, ACE members - what's the deal here?

: /Jon
: -- 
: Jon Anthony
: Organon Motives, Inc.
: Belmont, MA 02178
: 617.484.3383
: jsa@organon.com

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oliver E. Cole                                               oec@ocsystems.com
OC Systems, Inc.          http://www.ocsystems.com/             (703) 359-8165

Object ADA

[AA HOLMES]

Has anyone else had problems with missing files with the free Oblect ADA
download ? 
I seem to be missing files for the GUI builder. The help file refers to a
directory concerned with the GUI builder which isn't there. Aonix say that
their compiler is complete so I don't understand why these should be
missing. I have e-mailed aonix but I thought I would post here incase I
did't get a reply or it's a case of something I have missed or
misunderstood, which someone can put me right about.

Any help will save me learning C++ when I know ADA better

Aidan Holmes
  "Back up my hard drive?  How do I put it in reverse?" Anon

Re: Object ADA

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <Pine.GSO.3.95.980105125452.8865A-100000@dcsun4.comp.brad.ac.uk>, AA HOLMES <aaholmes@comp.brad.ac.uk> writes:
> Has anyone else had problems with missing files with the free Oblect ADA
> download ? 

Yes, and they reported it either here on CLA or on the Intel-ObjectAda
mailing list.  As I recall the answer from Aonix is that the GUI builder
does not come with the free version.  (I presume the help files are the
same ones which come with the paid product, and also include mention of
additional features one only gets with the higher levels of the paid product.)

> Any help will save me learning C++ when I know ADA better

As time goes bu it naturally gets harder and harder to be the very first
one to ask a particular question.  Deja News on the World Wide Web has
archival records of CLA postings, while the Aonix FTP site has archival
records of their mailing list.  I would suggest checking these out in
order to learn the answer to questions you have not yet encountered :-)

Larry Kilgallen