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: 103376,88ed72d98e6b3457 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-05 08:16:30 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3F8035B0.7080902@noplace.com> From: Marin David Condic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (OEM-HPQ-PRS1C03) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Standard Library Interest? References: <3F7F760E.2020901@comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 15:16:29 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.24.227 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net 1065366989 209.165.24.227 (Sun, 05 Oct 2003 08:16:29 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2003 08:16:29 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:266 Date: 2003-10-05T15:16:29+00:00 List-Id: Yes, its true that the ARG will fix problems, but please be fair about it. The ARG wouldn't, for example, discover that Java just added a library branch to cover Computational Fluid Dynamics that was proving to be wildly popular and decide that this was a "problem" for Ada and release a CFD library of their own within 6 months. So realistically, you're looking at a ten year cycle before a new library branch could be added. Also, it might be technically true that the language comes up for revision review on a 5 year cycle, but given that it is almost 2004, we'd have Ada83..Ada95..Ada04 - looks pretty much like 10 years to me, plus or minus a little. So while the review of Ada95 should have started in 2000, it isn't at all realistic to presume that we're going to start the next review cycle in 2005 when we have not yet got Ada0x out the door. I'm not criticizing the ARG or its efforts or the value of the standard. It definitely *needs* some stability and a long review cycle and careful consideration given to each item included in it and extreme detail outlined to make each item validatable. What I'm saying is that when you want to provide features or functionality that doesn't require a revision of the compiler and you want to react quickly to market demands, the standard is *not* the place to go because it simply takes too long. Hence my appeal to get a library outside of the ARM. MDC Robert I. Eachus wrote: > standard has a slow revision cycle. Technically, the standard is > considered for revision every five years, but in practice if there are > problems, the ARG will fix them as soon as possible. Unicode/ISO10646 -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "All reformers, however strict their social conscience, live in houses just as big as they can pay for." --Logan Pearsall Smith ======================================================================