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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac39a12d5faf5b14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-11 09:45:37 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!unlisys!news.snafu.de!boavista!nobody From: Michael Erdmann Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Development process in the Ada community Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 18:48:27 +0200 Organization: [Posted via] Inter.net Germany GmbH Message-ID: <3CB5BE5B.8020009@snafu.de> References: <3CB46975.90408@snafu.de> <3CB516E1.9030008@snafu.de> <3CB583D6.9000104@worldnet.att.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: tc11-n67-122.de.inter.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204 X-Accept-Language: en-us To: Jim Rogers Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22370 Date: 2002-04-11T18:48:27+02:00 List-Id: Jim Rogers wrote: > Michael Erdmann wrote: > >> If you compare Ada 95 with Java, then the interesting points are >> not the languages it self, but the quick development of supporting >> components around it. If you take Ada 95 there is only a very >> limited set of predefined libraries standarized and thats it, >> nothing else. With JPC this is completly different! >> >> What i like to say it that not the language Ada is the illness, >> but the process around it which does not generate the dynamic >> as i would expect it from a language which is a live. > > > > Let's look at recent results of JPC efforts. > > j2sdk1.4.0 contains a new package java.nio. This package > attempts to provide high performance I/O for Java. It provides > direct access to a unix-like select command, as well as > memory-mapped files, explicit buffers, and character > translation. The "n" in "nio" stands for "new". This is a > terrible name for a package. Beyond that quibble is the fact > that this package seriously violates one of the foundation > principles of the Java language. Java has always advertised the > concept of "write once, run anywhere". One consequence of this > goal is that Java could not support OS specific behavior, since > that behavior could not be implemented anywhere. The java.nio > package abandons that goal and implements I/O features not found > on all OS platforms. It also provides an I/O model which is > incompatible with the I/O defined in the java.io package. > > This is an example of rapid change without regard to its effect on > the overall language principles. I do not want to see such rapid > development results applied to Ada. > > Jim Rogers > I agree on this, may be they are a litle bit to fast, but i think Ada is i little bit to slow. Such things are happening in all kinds of instituations. But what i like to emphesze here the fact, that there IS A PROCESS (which might be missused as well) which is more public then ISO or ANSI. I think this is very important since the Ada communitiy does not consist only of developers doing brain surgery on atomic missiles but also on a lot of developers in smaller project which are using Ada 95 as well. To get these people in the process via the net would be a great achievement! Regards M.Erdmann