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: 2002-04-12 16:50:50 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!unlisys!news.snafu.de!boavista!nobody
From: Michael Erdmann <Michael.Erdmann@snafu.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Development process in the Ada community
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 01:52:17 +0200
Organization: [Posted via] Inter.net Germany GmbH
Message-ID: <3CB77331.2030005@snafu.de>
References: <3CB46975.90408@snafu.de> <ub9ikg41ca8qa0@corp.supernews.com>
 <3CB516E1.9030008@snafu.de> <c075a65c.0204110241.1937f7fd@posting.google.com>
 <3CB5BED1.3090702@snafu.de> <a94k7d$n4m$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tc01-n71-221.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
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22468
Date: 2002-04-13T01:52:17+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Marin David Condic wrote:
> "Michael Erdmann" <Michael.Erdmann@snafu.de> wrote in message
> news:3CB5BED1.3090702@snafu.de...
> 
>>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.
>>
>>
> 
> Maybe there needs to be an appendix to the ARM called Interfaces.Sockets? It
> might even impose a layer on top that provided a whole Ada-ish look and feel
> to the endeavor, rather than being just a thin binding.

I guess a more sbatract concept for interprocess communication on basis
of streams would be more apropriate. Personally i am always in favor of
complext services provided to the developen rather than doing low
level coding using a thin binding.

> 
> A few things like this could go quite far in improving portable development
> life by getting an OS-independent view of common services. (With the usual
> stipulation that an implementation need not provide it at all, but if it
> does, it will have this interface.)

Maybe the basic ideas of Java can be resued here?


Regards
    M.Erdmann