Re: problem with abstract types

[Ulrich Eckhardt <uli.e@gmx.de>]

Stephen Leake wrote:
>>Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
>>
>>As promised a first pre-alpha version of this package
>>is available (under GPL) from
>>http://www.uli-eckhardt.de/ada_registry

> If files suffice under Unix, then files will suffice under Windows,

Yes and No. For example there is no standard location on
windows where user dependend files are stored. But the
registry has suitable places. On the other hand on Unix
not registry exists, but there is a common place for user
dependend files under /home/<username>/.

Also it makes sense to store all this config informations under
Windows in the registry so that all the windows guys can use
their preferred tools for replication/backup/distribution.

My package should handle this things transparently without the
need of worring how the configuration options are really stored
on every platform.

> and you don't need the registry. On the other hand, if you need the
> registry (for multi-process interaction), then you need it under

It's not a primary goal to access the windows registry. Maybe i will
add some support functions for this to the windows part.

> I have nothing against an Ada interface to the Windows registry; I'm
> just suggesting you be consistent across the two platforms.

Yes, thats my primary goal. It should be a consitent interface
which stores the configuration options on all platforms in their
"native" form. Also it should be easy to create new modules
which for example may access an LDAP server.


Uli
-- 
Ulrich Eckhardt
http://www.uli-eckhardt.de