Re: Linux Kernel in Ada. Repost

["Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@kvaerner.no>]

Mich@western_world_somehwere wrote :
>Do you think it is trivial to write a fully working Ada posix binding?
>by saying just go read a book to do it, shows that you really do not
>know what is involved here. Have a look at the current Ada binding posix
>code just to see what is there. Remember, you have to implement all
>the posix standard, not just 5 easy little functions.

Please readjust your expectations. It is usually not neccessary to implement
the full Posix to write an application. I have done the same with a part of the
OS/2 API that I wanted to use. It is work, but not neccessarily a lot of work.

>Ada's problem is that there is no central group that handles it as far as
>devloping API's, libraries, etc.. and to coordinates things. This central
>group can then organize who is working on what, to eliminate waste and
>duplication. Something like goes on in the Linux world to some extent.


That is entirely true. There is a tendency to do everything the official way.
That means that nothing happens for years. However there is hope; there are
people who seem to spend a lot of time creating Ada code for the common public.

It would be nice to have an library architect (or a number of them) for
mainstream Ada (mainstream here means general computing). It may very well be
that this is required for Ada to reach the big time in our lifetime.

>Java has Sun. VB and VC++ has MS. Ada used to have the defense department,
>but it divorsed it after more than 20 years difficult marriage.
>(btw, I think the Linux ALT group are doing a great job, may be they
>can drive more Ada projects like this one, and people will help them).


Gnat has done more for Ada than anything else the DoD has ever done. If Ada
goes fully mainstream it will probably be professor Dewars fault :-) This does
not belittle what others have done, just an acknowledgement that Gnat is the
foundation.


Greetings,