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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9c86eb13dd395066
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Subject: Re: CRC in Ada?
Date: 1997/03/14
Message-ID: <5gahn0$rnq$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 225412284
References: <5g98ai$gqi@news2.delphi.com>
Organization: Comp Sci, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
NNTP-Posting-User: ok
Date: 1997-03-14T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


tmoran@bix.com writes:
>> it never worries me to interface to C where that is appropriate
> Me neither.  But it does worry me if interfacing to C is appropriate
>too often.

Aren't we in danger of forgetting the POSIX binding for Ada?
If C can do IO efficiently on UNIX, it's because it can do system calls.
THERE IS NO REASON TO EXPECT C IO TO BE EFFICIENT ON OTHER SYSTEMS, and
in fact it often _isn't_ efficient.  One of the last things I did for
Quintus, whose Prolog system was layered on top of C stdio, was to
design a new IO interface that could be efficiently layered directly
on top of QSAM or RMS or UNIX system calls, without incurring the
overheads of going through getc() and its close relatives.  Ada
stream-IO buffers look amazingly familiar...

-- 
Will maintain COBOL for money.
Richard A. O'Keefe; http://www.cs.rmit.edu.au/%7Eok; RMIT Comp.Sci.