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: 2003-10-31 19:05:05 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!d9c68f36!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3FA322D8.2040003@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? (The Big Player ACT) References: <3F82B4A4.5060301@noplace.com> <3F82F527.3020101@noplace.com> <3F9EFDC6.7050508@noplace.com> <254c16a.0310290635.1a8b09d2@posting.google.com> <3FA04E6E.2070000@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 03:05:04 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.2.13 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net 1067655904 209.165.2.13 (Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:05:04 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:05:04 EST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1884 Date: 2003-11-01T03:05:04+00:00 List-Id: > > There is extensive documentation for Charles, though (1) it is named > STL elsewhere, and (2) Charles is "an Ada library", so there are > differences. However, being "modelled principally on the C++ STL", > there are quite some good books covering STL usage and concepts, > and thus, mutatis mutandis, some Charles concepts. > There is an enormoous difference between getting a library that, when installed (with an install shield or similar - not just "unpack it and figure it out for yourself) has a built-in hyperlinked document that gives you help on any given class or method you can point at and click, versus someone saying "You can always get a good book for a library that was written in a different language and figure that our library lines up pretty close to that one." Whatever documentation is available for Charles, it isn't an integrated part of the library. There may be any number of ways for the determined user to find out what Charles does, but it isn't just standing right there saying "Here I am - let me tell you more about it..." Does the documentation even come with the distribution? Does the documentation hyperlink to the code after installation - or, more importantly, does the code hyperlink to the documentation? Really first rate documentation is a *HARD* thing to achieve and (not to criticize Charles) I have not seen any all-volunteer, freebie products out there for Ada that meet the truly professional standards one can expect from many commercial products. While ACT is free to do whatever they like, I would find it unlikely that they would glom onto Charles as-is and just start distributing it. They'd either wait until a better level of documentation were done or have to invest their own energy into doing so. In either case, I think that vendor involvement and support is much more likely to get the job done than waiting for volunteers to do it - especially when those volunteers don't see any potential reward other than the fame, glory and opportunity to meet chicks. > (Does it help knowing that STL work began with Ada and Scheme? :) > Nope. If I loved the STL so much, I'd run off and use C++. Ada having inspired the STL and Charles having copied the STL is pretty irrelevant. Its Ada saying "Me too!!!" rather than "I'm head-and-shoulders above the STL!" > And aren't there extensive reports about the Booch components? > For the 83 version, you have a book covering a lot. > Booch is a writer, too, isn't he, so I gather that the free > Booch components aren't lightyears away from MS libraries, even > where the documents aren't in the distribution, or in the source > files? > It is still light years away. In the case of MSVC++ and the MFC - I lay down some money, I run through an install shield and *BAM*! There I am with a library and hyperlinked documentation built into an IDE that is extremely thorough and complete. In the other, I download Booch. I go looking for books - which I probably have to order because it isn't at the local Barnes and Noble, I study the text for hours, I get a question about some class or method and I'm off leafing through paper, etc. In situation 1, it is very convenient, easy, direct, immediate, etc. In the other, I have to put forth all sorts of effort to get all the pieces and I have no guarantee that any of it is even connected or up to date. If you want to gain users, you must make it as EASY and PAINLESS as possible to get REALLY high quality stuff. Users are like water flowing downhill - they seek the path of least resistance. You can argue all day long "But this is just as good as.....!!!!!" and they will stay away from your product in droves if there is something easier and more complete out there. I don't have to argue the point - they're doing it for me by avoiding Ada like the plague. > What do you think about the descriptions in the source files of > Mats Weber's components? > Have not looked at it. However, I still think there is a qualitative difference between someone saying "Here's my source code and here's 20something pages of description of whats in it" and someone saying "Here's my library and help is a point-and-click away on *anything* in it." Obviously, a library with a user's manual is better than a library with nothing more than source code. Clearly a library with a user's manual that is hyperlinked to the source code is superior to just a user's manual. Ultimately, the user's manual has to be clearly written, thorough, up-to-date, etc. Its just that if you look at the *competition*, they're offering a lot more than a batch of source code and a .PDF file with some general descriptions of what's in it. You can't say "I'm *almost* that good." You have to say "I'm *superior*!" or nobody has any incentive to switch from what they've got to what you're offering. MDC -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "So if I understand 'The Matrix Reloaded' correctly, the Matrix is basically a Microsoft operating system - it runs for a while and then crashes and reboots. By design, no less. Neo is just a memory leak that's too hard to fix, so they left him in... The users don't complain because they're packed in slush and kept sedated" -- Marin D. Condic ======================================================================