From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5b8d7f09531ce5fa
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: TCP/IP with GNAT
Date: 1997/01/08
Message-ID: <1997Jan8.064922.1@eisner>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 208483121
x-nntp-posting-host: eisner.decus.org
references: <MPLANET.32d27263geme989681@news.alpha.net>
x-nntp-posting-user: KILGALLEN
x-trace: 852724165/28200
organization: LJK Software
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-01-08T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <MPLANET.32d27263geme989681@news.alpha.net>, geme@baraboo.com (Gabriel Emerson) writes:

>   As a military-grade programming language, it would seem to me that GNAT 
> should have cross-platform socket support.  Can anyone point me in the 
> right direction here?  Thanks!

I am sure someone who knows more about it will tell you where to find
some bindings.  I wanted to point out that multi-platform TCP/IP
support is not necessarily going to be transparent unless you stick
to a formal specification like Posix. I hear that even some Unix
systems have differences and an alternate API than "sockets".  I
know on VMS there are 5 different sources of TCP/IP implementations,
each slightly different.

I use the term "multi-platform" rather than "cross-platform"
because I keep running into discussions of "cross-platform"
where the author means just two platforms.  Which two is
most often Macintosh and Microsoft, neatly omitting the
interests of a lot of folk who contribute to c.l.a.

Larry Kilgallen