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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,80ae596d36288e8a X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!195.62.100.243.MISMATCH!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed0.kamp.net!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!news2.arglkargh.de!news.n-ix.net!news.belwue.de!LF.net!news.enyo.de!not-for-mail From: Florian Weimer Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Why no socket package in the standard ? Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 15:55:25 +0200 Message-ID: <87k4d4z6b6.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ruchba.enyo.de 1307022926 4718 172.17.135.6 (2 Jun 2011 13:55:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@enyo.de Cancel-Lock: sha1:CPkN3WCG3euOdDL85jqgDLeIZ14= Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:20582 Date: 2011-06-02T15:55:25+02:00 List-Id: * Randy Brukardt: > Defining a package spec is easy enough (many have done that), but describing > what it does in a target-independent way is a much bigger job. Note that > there is no ISO standard (so far as I'm aware) that describes BSD Sockets, > so we'd have to recreate at least some description of those in the Ada > Standard. I believe they are part of ISO/IEC 9945:2002. However, it turns out that there already is an ISO standard for an Ada interface to BSD sockets (which happens to include a file system interface, too): ISO/IEC 14519:2001. Efforts to standardize operating system interfaces should rather concentrate on liberating that document to increase adoption, addressing open issues, if necessary; and not be wasted on duplicating it. I think this offers a cautionary tale why proprietary standards can be really, really bad.