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: 103376,45afe5f0a76ee29c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Chad Bremmon <chad.bremmon@comm.hq.af.mil>
Subject: Re: Ada Foundation Classes
Date: 1996/07/31
Message-ID: <31FF7844.2C4E@comm.hq.af.mil>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 171937444
references: <31FE15A6.53A@comm.hq.af.mil> <00001a73+0000309b@msn.com>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: SAM-GAPR
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.01Gold (WinNT; I)
Date: 1996-07-31T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Kenneth Mays wrote:
> 
> This is an interesting topic since I have been looking into MFC 4.x
> for quite some time. Consider interfacing Ada compilers with the MFC
> library instead of reinventing the wheel.
> 
> Then again, if you find a few college grads with a lot of spare time
> on their hands then by all means - knock yourself out!!!!! Any
> improvements in Ada for PC programming is a welcomed treat in my
> book! :oD
> 
> Good Luck
> 
> KenIf we were only concerned with making applications 
work on the Microsoft platform, a binding to the 
currently existing MFCs would be the answer.  When 
I do that, however, I blow portability out of the 
water.  If we can get non OS specific at some 
level.  It may require 2 api's:  One for the 
standard interface and one beneath the standard 
interface for the non-standard OS interface. So 
what I'm saying is we're not re-inventing the 
wheel, just making it turn. . .in a standard way.

Chad