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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,43d910f082521047 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Received: by 10.180.103.197 with SMTP id fy5mr1182813wib.1.1344263183742; Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:26:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.66.90.102 with SMTP id bv6mr1081982pab.34.1344263183593; Mon, 06 Aug 2012 07:26:23 -0700 (PDT) Path: n2ni69501013win.0!nntp.google.com!7no2472659wig.0!news-out.google.com!g9ni19524583pbo.0!nntp.google.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!novia!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!94.232.116.13.MISMATCH!feed.xsnews.nl!border-3.ams.xsnews.nl!border3.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border4.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.panservice.it!aioe.org!usenet.pasdenom.info!dedibox.gegeweb.org!gegeweb.eu!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 13:56:03 +0200 From: Georg Bauhaus User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: questions on Ada openGL binding in the GLOBE3D packages References: <492254f2-fb07-4949-9348-3b79694608ce@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <492254f2-fb07-4949-9348-3b79694608ce@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <501a6ad4$0$6553$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> Organization: Arcor NNTP-Posting-Date: 02 Aug 2012 13:56:04 CEST NNTP-Posting-Host: 23688073.newsspool4.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=ViXkc^1ZkV1LNKYb?b>0764IUK:Lh>_cHTX3j=MWk52m28S:? X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de X-Original-Bytes: 3272 X-Received-Bytes: 3555 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: 2012-08-02T13:56:04+02:00 List-Id: On 02.08.12 13:12, Egil H�vik wrote: >> Why not keep things standard? The standard is there. > > You seem to be confused. What you call "the standard" is > just the C binding. The standard explicitly states that > example syntax is in C, and that other languages with better > namespace handling and subprogram overloading can do things > differently. > Writing GL.Vertex is more readable than GL.glVertex2d. > Let the compiler figure out the types of your parameters, > and how many, you specify. It will complain if it can't find > a match. > > Some people complain about Ada being too verbose; In this case, > I would say C is more verbose, why should that be a bad thing > for Ada? Perception provides for a valid argument: If books about OpenGL, and other material considered relevant, use the names and example syntax, this creates an expectation. To dispel the power of expectations, you'd need to name a few killer features, features that warrant deviation from what everybody else is perceived to be doing. Or you'd demonstrate, convincingly, that a significantly perceivable number of relevant teams do *not* use the expected names and syntax. There were two bindings to the OS/2 API. One binding copied IBM's names exactly, as they were used in IBM's documentation, reflecting the names in the C based O-O system: DosXyz123, GpiSomeThing, WinEtcFoo. The other binding made Dos, Gpi, Win, ... into packages. Not everyone agreed with the second approach. The argument against package might be stronger in this case because IBM's O-O design was written in C, IIUC, so these were the "real" names. It there a strong technical argument in favor of using package software in stead of names implying packages? Better visibility control? Better compilation performance due to separation? Better change management by modularization?