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: 103376,6413b417b806eb28 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Samuel Mize Subject: Re: Linux Kernel in Ada. Repost Date: 1999/04/12 Message-ID: <7et6j7$1qlr@news1.newsguy.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 465538767 References: <7eg43i$d3b$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <370CC730.4C6112DB@utech.net> <370D7007.2D3AD58B@rocketmail.com> <7el9so$geb@drn.newsguy.com> <7elrg5$egk2@ftp.kvaerner.com> <7emjk8$rp3@drn.newsguy.com> <7ep6uj$o97$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7ep9p3$9fm@drn.newsguy.com> <7eqipd$p0n$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> Organization: ImagiNet Communications, Ltd. User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-981002 ("Phobia") (UNIX) (AIX/3-2) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-04-12T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > In article <7ep9p3$9fm@drn.newsguy.com>, > mike@nospam wrote: ... >> This is a waste of time for me having to do this >> everytime I encounter a new struct, and having each Ada >> programmer do the same becuase there is no common >> Ada/Posix binding to use that allready did all this >> work for us. > > Well first of all, if you are talking about the IEEE > standard binding, there most certainly is a common > binding. > > If you are talking about a comprehensive thin binding, > so far we have seen no demand for such a thing, which > is why it does not exist, at least in the GNAT world. > If someone wants to volunteer to create this, great! And this brings the discussion around full circle. There isn't much work being done on extending Linux with Ada, because it requires a thin binding, which doesn't exist because there's so little demand -- because there isn't much work being done on extending Linux with Ada! ACT's business plan aims them in a different direction -- they won't be the ones to break this cycle. Fortunately, it shouldn't take a big, costly effort. Someone could set up a web site, and guide the architecture of the thin binding. You want it set up so that it ports to a new OS by changing a couple of key packages that everything else depends on (one of the few times it's good for everything to "with" in a "global types" package). You might also want to set up a standardized tool to extract the critical constants from the C headers and generate the Ada packages to define them. Robert Dewar has rightly pointed out the level of coordination, negotiation and consensus-building that it would require to create a thin binding as a true standard -- that is, a standard agreed to by such accrediting organizations as ISO and ANSI. But a good de facto standard for a thin Linux/Posix/Unix binding may do a lot to enhance Ada's market penetration. I hope the original poster, or one of the other interested parties, has the time and inclination to do this. I think it could do a lot of good. Best, Sam Mize -- Samuel Mize -- smize@imagin.net (home email) -- Team Ada Fight Spam: see http://www.cauce.org/ \\\ Smert Spamonam