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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac7b7bb8bd6ab254
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Mats Weber <Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch>
Subject: Re: GNAT for Unix systems programming?
Date: 1997/03/11
Message-ID: <3325AB0C.1136@elca-matrix.ch>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 224809647
References: <5g3iao$agt@fg70.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>
Organization: ELCA Matrix SA
Reply-To: Mats.Weber@elca-matrix.ch
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Thomas Koenig wrote:
> 
> I'd like to know how good GNAT is for systems programming under
> Unix, especially for networking.

If you want to access UNIX stuff, you should definitely do so through
the standard POSIX 1003.5 binding.

By the way, is there an implementation of that standard that works with
GNAT ?

> Is there any standard for interfacing with the Berkeley socket
> interface and auxiliary routines (inet_ntoa and all the rest)?

Unfortunately not, but some non-standard packages do this quite well:
- Paradise (I don't know if this still exists)
- Parts of the GNAT implementation of the Ada 95 distributed systems
annex. I don't know if some packages in there are designed for direct
use by programs doing socket communication, but I'm sure someone else
will clarify this.