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 10:16:03 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.r-kom.de!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 18:50:25 +0200 Organization: [Posted via] Inter.net Germany GmbH Message-ID: <3CB5BED1.3090702@snafu.de> References: <3CB46975.90408@snafu.de> <3CB516E1.9030008@snafu.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: tc08-n66-170.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: Martin Dowie Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22372 Date: 2002-04-11T18:50:25+02:00 List-Id: Martin Dowie wrote: >>I personally think this way of working is fairly outdated since >>it does not realy take the internet as a comminication media into >>accout. >>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. >> >>Have there any attempts made to change the process towards a more >>dynmaic way of working? >> > > I work in avionics but not in any safety related work just now. In > our developments such things as standard Directory & Socket packages > (and a few others queues, lists etc) would be a great boon. There is a POSIX based package available (florist) and adasockets from S. Tardieu but they are not part of the Ada predefined packages. It is a pitty. > > Has any progress/agreement been made on the work to generate a 'standard' > Directory package? > > Standard "Interfaces.Java" & "Interfaces.CPP" would be _very_ usefull too. >