Please list all the Ada libraries you know

Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[ferrariv65]

This thread is a spin-off of another thread (see https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.ada/aMPop0FJKfM).

Please list here all the Ada libraries you know, with links and a brief description.

The final outcome should be a more or less comprehensive list of the available Ada libraries.

Thanks

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Dmitry A. Kazakov]

On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 08:42:44 -0800 (PST), ferrariv65@gmail.com wrote:

> Please list here all the Ada libraries you know, with links and a brief description.

Here is the list of the libraries I maintain:

1. Ada industrial control widget library (gauges, meters, oscilloscopes,
plotting):

http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/aicwl.htm 

2. Fuzzy machine learning framework (AI)

http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/fuzzy_ml.htm

3. Fuzzy sets (fuzzy and IFS sets, numbers, linguistic variables, GTK
widgets for)

http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/fuzzy.htm

4. GtkAda contributions (an extension of GtkAda, provides bindings missing
in GtkAda, tasking support)

http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/gtkada_contributions.htm

5. Interval arithmetic (intervals with integer and real bounds)

http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/intervals.htm

6. Measurement units (handling dimensioned values, I/O of, GTK widgets)

http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/units.htm

7. Simple components (containers, graphs, lists, persistency layer,
SQLite-/ODBC-bindings, IEEE 754 representations, stacks, streams, pools,
synchronization primitives, table-driven parsers

http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/components.htm

8. String editing (Editing numeric values, UTF-8 conversions, maps and
sets, wildcard pattern matching)

http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/strings_edit.htm

9. Tables (case-insensitive tables, parsing texts using a table)

http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de/ada/tables.htm

All of them are packaged for Fedora (rpm) and Debian (deb), all support
GPR. No make files.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[J-P. Rosen]

Le 03/03/2013 17:42, ferrariv65@gmail.com a �crit :
> This thread is a spin-off of another thread (see
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.ada/aMPop0FJKfM).
> 
> Please list here all the Ada libraries you know, with links and a
> brief description.
> 
> The final outcome should be a more or less comprehensive list of the
> available Ada libraries.
> 
Have a look at http://www.adalog.fr/adaweb.htm

The explanations are in French, but most sites are in english, so if you
are just interested in the links, that should do the trick. Click on
"Biblioth�ques et bindings" (Libraries and bindings) to go directly to
the library part

-- 
J-P. Rosen
Adalog
2 rue du Docteur Lombard, 92441 Issy-les-Moulineaux CEDEX
Tel: +33 1 45 29 21 52, Fax: +33 1 45 29 25 00
http://www.adalog.fr

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Jacob Sparre Andersen]

ferrariv65@gmail.com writes:

> Please list here all the Ada libraries you know, with links and a
> brief description.

Ada Information Clearinghouse: Free Tools and Libraries

   http://www.adaic.org/ada-resources/tools-libraries/

Greetings,

Jacob
-- 
"Common sense is not common at all."

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Shark8]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 9:42:44 AM UTC-7, ferra...@gmail.com wrote:
> This thread is a spin-off of another thread (see https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.ada/aMPop0FJKfM).
> 
> Please list here all the Ada libraries you know, with links and a brief description.
> 
> The final outcome should be a more or less comprehensive list of the available Ada libraries.

I'm working (on and off) on a OpenGL binding to the latest [OpenGL 4.3] for Ada2012; taking advantage of pre- and post-conditions  as well as Ada's strong typing --
https://github.com/OneWingedShark/TAO-GL

The next revision I push to git will entail some extensive changes, especially because I'll alter the architecture so that the "types" package containing the object-enumerations are dynamically-filled upon instantiation -- meaning the functions package will have to become generic as well.

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)]

Le Mon, 04 Mar 2013 02:02:52 +0100, Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com> a  
écrit:
> I'm working (on and off) on a OpenGL binding to the latest [OpenGL 4.3]  
> for Ada2012; taking advantage of pre- and post-conditions  as well as  
> Ada's strong typing --
> https://github.com/OneWingedShark/TAO-GL

I guess you edited this on Mac or Windows, as you used title‑cased  
file‑names. Just a comment: on platforms where file‑name casing matters,  
GNAT generates warnings for each source files it compiles which does not  
use all‑lower‑case file‑names.


-- 
“Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.” [1]
“Structured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.” [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming — Alan J. — P. Yale University

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Shark8]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 6:23:44 PM UTC-7, Hibou57 (Yannick Duchêne) wrote:
> 
> I guess you edited this on Mac or Windows, as you used title-cased  
> file-names. Just a comment: on platforms where file-name casing matters,  
> GNAT generates warnings for each source files it compiles which does not  
> use all-lower-case file-names.

Really!? I did not know that...
Is it a deal-breaker for users of unix/linux? (It seems rather counter-intuitive to the case-insensitivity of Ada.)

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[J-P. Rosen]

Le 04/03/2013 04:32, Shark8 a �crit :
>> Just a comment: on platforms where file-name casing matters,  
>> > GNAT generates warnings for each source files it compiles which does not  
>> > use all-lower-case file-names.
> Really!? I did not know that...
> Is it a deal-breaker for users of unix/linux? (It seems rather counter-intuitive to the case-insensitivity of Ada.)

In a source model compiler, you need a way to go from a unit name to the
corresponding file name. In a case-sensitive OS, you need a casing
convention. GNAT chose all lower-case, because it is easy to remember
and enforce. An alternative could have been to use the same case as...
(what? the specification? the body?). And it would not necessary match
the casing of users.

-- 
J-P. Rosen
Adalog
2 rue du Docteur Lombard, 92441 Issy-les-Moulineaux CEDEX
Tel: +33 1 45 29 21 52, Fax: +33 1 45 29 25 00
http://www.adalog.fr

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Adam Beneschan]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 10:32:28 PM UTC-8, J-P. Rosen wrote:

> In a source model compiler, you need a way to go from a unit name to the
> corresponding file name. In a case-sensitive OS, you need a casing
> convention.

Well, no, you don't "need" one.  Once you know what directory you're looking in, it's not all that difficult to look for any file whose name matches what you're looking for without regard to letter case.  

                              -- Adam

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[gautier_niouzes]

Le lundi 4 mars 2013 21:43:30 UTC+1, Adam Beneschan a écrit :

> Well, no, you don't "need" one.  Once you know what directory you're looking in, it's not all that difficult to look for any file whose name matches what you're looking for without regard to letter case.  

And you issue an error or a warning when there are two or more matching files ?
G.

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Shark8]

On Monday, March 4, 2013 2:09:26 PM UTC-7, gautier...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Le lundi 4 mars 2013 21:43:30 UTC+1, Adam Beneschan a écrit :
> 
> 
> 
> > Well, no, you don't "need" one.  Once you know what directory you're looking in, it's not all that difficult to look for any file whose name matches what you're looking for without regard to letter case.  
> 
> 
> 
> And you issue an error or a warning when there are two or more matching files?

No, you issue an error and refuse to compile it -- this forces the programmer/user to address the issue [artificially] caused by the file-system.

{Also, upon consideration, the file-system's case-sensitivity should NOT matter because of the library for compilation units -- ie this should handle the association between compilation-unit and file-name... GNAT's forgoing of the library-method, while at times convenient, seems to me to be the real culprit.}

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Ludovic Brenta]

Adam Beneschan writes:
> On Sunday, March 3, 2013 10:32:28 PM UTC-8, J-P. Rosen wrote:
>
>> In a source model compiler, you need a way to go from a unit name to the
>> corresponding file name. In a case-sensitive OS, you need a casing
>> convention.
>
> Well, no, you don't "need" one.  Once you know what directory you're
> looking in, it's not all that difficult to look for any file whose
> name matches what you're looking for without regard to letter case.

I think Jean-Pierre meant: you "need" a definition of "matches what
you're looking for".  Also, Ada does not require that all source files
be in a single directory, so the compiler needs some way to designate
the directories containing the sources.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[J-P. Rosen]

Le 04/03/2013 21:43, Adam Beneschan a �crit :
> Well, no, you don't "need" one.  Once you know what directory you're
> looking in, it's not all that difficult to look for any file whose
> name matches what you're looking for without regard to letter case.
> 
Sure. But that means doing a full directory search any time you refer to
a unit (just to check if by chance there is another file with the same
name and different casing) => a lot of disk access, and considering the
ratio of disk speed to memory speed nowadays, this is likely to have a
very sensible effect on speed for a very minor (IMHO) nuisance.

The other possible solution is to have a mapping from unit names to file
names. This is what Object-Ada does (AFAIK), and roughly what you get
with pragma Source_File_Name.
-- 
J-P. Rosen
Adalog
2 rue du Docteur Lombard, 92441 Issy-les-Moulineaux CEDEX
Tel: +33 1 45 29 21 52, Fax: +33 1 45 29 25 00
http://www.adalog.fr

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Simon Wright]

"J-P. Rosen" <rosen@adalog.fr> writes:

> The other possible solution is to have a mapping from unit names to file
> names. This is what Object-Ada does (AFAIK), and roughly what you get
> with pragma Source_File_Name.

Or, with GNAT Project, package Naming.

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)]

Le Wed, 06 Mar 2013 07:15:56 +0100, J-P. Rosen <rosen@adalog.fr> a écrit:
> The other possible solution is to have a mapping from unit names to file
> names. This is what Object-Ada does (AFAIK), and roughly what you get
> with pragma Source_File_Name.
(which is a GNAT's implementation specific pragma)

http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gnat_rm/Pragma-Source_005fFile_005fName.html
The above says:
> The optional Index argument should be used when afile contains multiple  
> units, and when you do notwant to use gnatchop to separate then into  
> multiplefiles

I did not knew GNAT can do this. Noted. It happened I read people coming  
 from Pascal, complaining Ada (well Ada with GNAT) needs to many files  
(separate files for spec and body). The next time I read this complaint, I  
will redirect to this GNAT pragma.


-- 
“Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.” [1]
“Structured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.” [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming — Alan J. — P. Yale University

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Simon Wright]

"Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> writes:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gnat_rm/Pragma-Source_005fFile_005fName.html
> The above says:
>> The optional Index argument should be used when afile contains
>> multiple units, and when you do notwant to use gnatchop to separate
>> then into multiplefiles
>
> I did not knew GNAT can do this. Noted. It happened I read people
> coming from Pascal, complaining Ada (well Ada with GNAT) needs to many
> files (separate files for spec and body). The next time I read this
> complaint, I will redirect to this GNAT pragma.

But it's a lot of work to set up/maintain either the configuration
pragmas of package Naming. Much simpler to gnatchop the lot and have
done with it.

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Simon Wright]

Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org> writes:

> But it's a lot of work to set up/maintain either the configuration
> pragmas of package Naming. Much simpler to gnatchop the lot and have
          or
> done with it.

oops

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Adam Beneschan]

On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 10:15:56 PM UTC-8, J-P. Rosen wrote:
> Le 04/03/2013 21:43, Adam Beneschan a écrit :
> 
> > Well, no, you don't "need" one.  Once you know what directory you're
> > looking in, it's not all that difficult to look for any file whose
> > name matches what you're looking for without regard to letter case.
> 
> Sure. But that means doing a full directory search any time you refer to
> a unit (just to check if by chance there is another file with the same
> name and different casing) => a lot of disk access, and considering the
> ratio of disk speed to memory speed nowadays, this is likely to have a
> very sensible effect on speed for a very minor (IMHO) nuisance.

If you're trying to say "big enough that one can sense it", "sensible" isn't the right word--it means something totally different.  "Noticeable" is probably the word you wanted.

Anyway, though, my feeling is that once one has chosen to build a "source model" compiler--which means, if I understand it correctly, that if you WITH a package then the compiler has to read the original source of the WITH'ed package specification--then one has already decided that disk access time isn't an issue.  (If it were, the compiler could do something to create a smaller, compressed version of the specification that it would read in instead of reading the original source.)  So whatever good reasons there might be for GNAT to default to a particular case convention, saving disk read time probably isn't a valid reason.

                            -- Adam

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Niklas Holsti]

On 13-03-06 19:08 , Adam Beneschan wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 5, 2013 10:15:56 PM UTC-8, J-P. Rosen wrote:
>> Le 04/03/2013 21:43, Adam Beneschan a �crit :
>>
>>> Well, no, you don't "need" one.  Once you know what directory you're
>>> looking in, it's not all that difficult to look for any file whose
>>> name matches what you're looking for without regard to letter case.
>>
>> Sure. But that means doing a full directory search any time you refer to
>> a unit (just to check if by chance there is another file with the same
>> name and different casing) => a lot of disk access, and considering the
>> ratio of disk speed to memory speed nowadays, this is likely to have a
>> very sensible effect on speed for a very minor (IMHO) nuisance.
> 
> If you're trying to say "big enough that one can sense it"
> "sensible" isn't the right word--it means something totally
> different.

Dictionaries disagree. Wiktionary
(http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sensible) has its two first meanings
agreeing with J-P's usage:

1. (now dated or formal) Perceptible by the senses.
2. Easily perceived; appreciable.

The Oxford Concise Dictionary (1950 edition) has the same (1), without
tagging it dated.

Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English (1974 edition)
has "good sense" or "reasonable" as the first meaning, but "can be
perceived by the senses" as the third meaning, without tagging this
meaning dated.

So "sensible" has multiple meanings.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
      .      @       .

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Adam Beneschan]

On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 11:01:24 AM UTC-8, Niklas Holsti wrote:

> So "sensible" has multiple meanings.

You may be technically correct.  My usual source, m-w.com, also lists a number of similar meanings.  But I have to say that, in 52 years of speaking and reading (American) English, I have *never* seen or heard the word "sensible" used in that manner, or in any manner other than what's given in the 4th definition at m-w.com, "having, containing, or indicative of good sense or reason", or the 5th one.  The examples they give in the first three definitions sound like a foreign language to me.  Frankly, I'm surprised to seem them there at all.  Perhaps I'm the outlier here, and other English speakers have heard the word "sensible" used with one of those meanings fairly often.  If so, I'd be interested to hear from them.  But based on my own experience, if you use the word "sensible" like that, other people will not understand what you're talking about.  And being technically correct counts for little if you're not understood.  So I'm standing by what I said.  

                            -- Adam

[OT] "sensible" in English (was: Please list all the Ada libraries you know)

[Ludovic Brenta]

Adam Beneschan writes on comp.lang.ada:
> On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 11:01:24 AM UTC-8, Niklas Holsti wrote:
>
>> So "sensible" has multiple meanings.
>
> You may be technically correct.  My usual source, m-w.com, also lists
> a number of similar meanings.  But I have to say that, in 52 years of
> speaking and reading (American) English, I have *never* seen or heard
> the word "sensible" used in that manner, or in any manner other than
> what's given in the 4th definition at m-w.com, "having, containing, or
> indicative of good sense or reason", or the 5th one.  The examples
> they give in the first three definitions sound like a foreign language
> to me.  Frankly, I'm surprised to seem them there at all.  Perhaps I'm
> the outlier here, and other English speakers have heard the word
> "sensible" used with one of those meanings fairly often.  If so, I'd
> be interested to hear from them.  But based on my own experience, if
> you use the word "sensible" like that, other people will not
> understand what you're talking about.  And being technically correct
> counts for little if you're not understood.  So I'm standing by what I
> said.

I'll have to support Adam here.  As a Frenchman I learned early on that
"sensible" was a "false friend" to native French speakers -- it looks
and sounds like a French word -- indeed, it *is* originally a French
word -- but has a totally different meaning than in French.  In French,
"sensible" means "sensitive" while the English "sensible" should be
translated as "sensé" (i.e. "that which makes sense").  I've never
encountered a different meaning, not even when reading Tolkien or
Shakespeare, who are both known for their "creative" use of English :)

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.

Re: [OT] "sensible" in English

[Niklas Holsti]

On 13-03-06 21:56 , Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> Adam Beneschan writes on comp.lang.ada:
>> On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 11:01:24 AM UTC-8, Niklas Holsti wrote:
>>
>>> So "sensible" has multiple meanings.
>>
>> You may be technically correct.  My usual source, m-w.com, also lists
>> a number of similar meanings.  But I have to say that, in 52 years of
>> speaking and reading (American) English, I have *never* seen or heard
>> the word "sensible" used in that manner, or in any manner other than
>> what's given in the 4th definition at m-w.com, "having, containing, or
>> indicative of good sense or reason", or the 5th one.  The examples
>> they give in the first three definitions sound like a foreign language
>> to me.  Frankly, I'm surprised to seem them there at all.  Perhaps I'm
>> the outlier here, and other English speakers have heard the word
>> "sensible" used with one of those meanings fairly often.  If so, I'd
>> be interested to hear from them.  But based on my own experience, if
>> you use the word "sensible" like that, other people will not
>> understand what you're talking about.  And being technically correct
>> counts for little if you're not understood.  So I'm standing by what I
>> said.
> 
> I'll have to support Adam here.  As a Frenchman I learned early on that
> "sensible" was a "false friend" to native French speakers -- it looks
> and sounds like a French word -- indeed, it *is* originally a French
> word -- but has a totally different meaning than in French.  In French,
> "sensible" means "sensitive" while the English "sensible" should be
> translated as "sensé" (i.e. "that which makes sense").  I've never
> encountered a different meaning, not even when reading Tolkien or
> Shakespeare, who are both known for their "creative" use of English :)
> 

It's curious that all the "Examples of SENSIBLE" at m-w.com use it in
the meaning "reasonable, having good sense", reflecting Adam's and
Ludovic's usage, while all the "Synonyms", "Antonyms", "Related Words",
and "Near Antonyms" refer to the meaning "perceptible, noticeable".

I googled for "difference sensible" and got several references to
"sensible heat", as opposed to "latent heat", which seem to be
thermodynamic concepts. I assume that "sensible heat" does not mean
"reasonable heat", but it is probably seldom used in everyday
conversation :-)

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
      .      @       .

Re: [OT] "sensible" in English

[Geoff]

On Wed, 06 Mar 2013 22:33:05 +0200, Niklas Holsti
<niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> wrote:

>It's curious that all the "Examples of SENSIBLE" at m-w.com use it in
>the meaning "reasonable, having good sense", reflecting Adam's and
>Ludovic's usage, while all the "Synonyms", "Antonyms", "Related Words",
>and "Near Antonyms" refer to the meaning "perceptible, noticeable".
>
>I googled for "difference sensible" and got several references to
>"sensible heat", as opposed to "latent heat", which seem to be
>thermodynamic concepts. I assume that "sensible heat" does not mean
>"reasonable heat", but it is probably seldom used in everyday
>conversation :-)

Indeed. The usage is archaic in the U.S., but then with the dumbing
down of America comes the deterioration of the language. I fear for
future generations here.

Citing the M-W definition, I think J-P's use was something along the
lines of a blend of 1(a) and 1(c), meaning "perceptible". 

Re: [OT] "sensible" in English

[Jeffrey Carter]

On 03/07/2013 12:04 AM, Geoff wrote:
 >
 > Indeed. The usage is archaic in the U.S., but then with the dumbing
 > down of America comes the deterioration of the language. I fear for
 > future generations here.
 >
 > Citing the M-W definition, I think J-P's use was something along the
 > lines of a blend of 1(a) and 1(c), meaning "perceptible".

FWIW, at the time Jane Austen's /Sense and Sensibility/ was published (1811), 
"Sensibility" meant the opposite of "sense": Marianne, the sister ruled by her 
emotions, had "sensibility".

-- 
Jeff Carter
"People called Romanes, they go the house?"
Monty Python's Life of Brian
79

Re: [OT] "sensible" in English

[Georg Bauhaus]

On 06.03.13 20:56, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> As a Frenchman I learned early on that
> "sensible" was a "false friend" to native French speakers -- it looks
> and sounds like a French word -- indeed, it*is*  originally a French
> word -- but has a totally different meaning than in French.

+1, and I'm technically German.

Anything wrong with choosing "noticeable", "measurable", or other
adjective for indicating that the effect can be perceived, but
is not to be just specified?

I get more adjectives for http://www.wordreference.com/deen/merklich
starting from my native language, but String'("sens") is not a prefix
of any.

[OT] "sensible" in English (was: Please list all the Ada libraries you know)

[Ada novice]

I agree to Ludovic's interpretations of sensible in English and in French. I speak both languages fluently.

Best Regards, 
YC

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Niklas Holsti]

On 13-03-06 21:34 , Adam Beneschan wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 11:01:24 AM UTC-8, Niklas Holsti wrote:
> 
>> So "sensible" has multiple meanings.
> 
> You may be technically correct.  My usual source, m-w.com, also lists
> a number of similar meanings.  But I have to say that, in 52 years of
> speaking and reading (American) English, I have *never* seen or heard
> the word "sensible" used in that manner,

My experience is a bit shorter - perhaps 45 years or so - but it seems I
have heard it so used, since I reacted to your statement before I
checked the dictionaries. But I agree that this meaning is unusual.

I know, for sure, that I have seen "insensible" used to mean
"unconscious", "unreactive", when describing a person's state of awareness.

> But based on my own
> experience, if you use the word "sensible" like that, other people
> will not understand what you're talking about.  And being technically
> correct counts for little if you're not understood.

I agree that one should use words in their common meaning, and in that
sense I agree with your advice that using "noticeable" or "appreciable"
is better that using the uncommon meaning of "sensible".

> So I'm standing by what I said.

I was only reacting to your absolute assertion that "sensible" cannot
mean what J-P used it to mean.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
      .      @       .

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Randy Brukardt]

I agree with Adam, below. I've never seen any of those other meanings for 
"sensible", either. Perhaps its a British English vs. American English 
thing? (Those Brits can't even use their own language right! :-).

                          Randy.

"Adam Beneschan" <adam@irvine.com> wrote in message 
news:cb3ebee2-b0fb-4e56-8c4a-a1bf52ce4e25@googlegroups.com...
On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 11:01:24 AM UTC-8, Niklas Holsti wrote:

> So "sensible" has multiple meanings.

You may be technically correct.  My usual source, m-w.com, also lists a 
number of similar meanings.  But I have to say that, in 52 years of speaking 
and reading (American) English, I have *never* seen or heard the word 
"sensible" used in that manner, or in any manner other than what's given in 
the 4th definition at m-w.com, "having, containing, or indicative of good 
sense or reason", or the 5th one.  The examples they give in the first three 
definitions sound like a foreign language to me.  Frankly, I'm surprised to 
seem them there at all.  Perhaps I'm the outlier here, and other English 
speakers have heard the word "sensible" used with one of those meanings 
fairly often.  If so, I'd be interested to hear from them.  But based on my 
own experience, if you use the word "sensible" like that, other people will 
not understand what you're talking about.  And being technically correct 
counts for little if you're not understood.  So I'm standing by what I said.

                            -- Adam 

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Geoff]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 11:34:21 -0800 (PST), Adam Beneschan
<adam@irvine.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 11:01:24 AM UTC-8, Niklas Holsti wrote:
>
>> So "sensible" has multiple meanings.
>
>You may be technically correct.  My usual source, m-w.com, also lists a number of similar meanings.  But I have to say that, in 52 years of speaking and reading (American) English, I have *never* seen or heard the word "sensible" used in that manner, or in any manner other than what's given in the 4th definition at m-w.com, "having, containing, or indicative of good sense or reason", or the 5th one.  The examples they give in the first three definitions sound like a foreign language to me.  Frankly, I'm surprised to seem them there at all.  Perhaps I'm the outlier here, and other English speakers have heard the word "sensible" used with one of those meanings fairly often.  If so, I'd be interested to hear from them.  But based on my own experience, if you use the word "sensible" like that, other people will not understand what you're talking about.  And being technically correct counts for little if you're not understood.  So I'm standing by what I said.  
>
>                            -- Adam

I have to disagree with Adam. The usage is valid in that context and I
understood the meaning immediately. 

As a native American English speaker and one who has read English
authors like H.G. Wells and Arthur Conan-Doyle, I can say that the
usage of sensible as a synonym of perceptible or noticeable is valid
but somewhat archaic, I think it found more usage in the 19th century
than in the 20th. 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sensible

M-W lists enough synonyms and related words like tangible or apparent
that it should have been understood to mean "discernable" or
noticeable.

Just my two cents worth.

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Simon Wright]

Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> writes:

> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sensible
>
> M-W lists enough synonyms and related words like tangible or apparent
> that it should have been understood to mean "discernable" or
> noticeable.

Interesting that the normal (BrE as well as AmE) meanings are the 4th
and 5th definitions!

I say 'normal', as indicated by the fact that none of the three examples
corresponds to definitions 1..3.

See also the M-W Learner's Dictonary:
http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/sensible

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[J-P. Rosen]

Le 06/03/2013 18:08, Adam Beneschan a �crit :
> If you're trying to say "big enough that one can sense it",
> "sensible" isn't the right word--it means something totally
> different.  "Noticeable" is probably the word you wanted.
I confess that I've been trapped. I did mean noticeable, but I typed too
fast...

> Anyway, though, my feeling is that once one has chosen to build a
> "source model" compiler--which means, if I understand it correctly,
> that if you WITH a package then the compiler has to read the original
> source of the WITH'ed package specification--then one has already
> decided that disk access time isn't an issue.  (If it were, the
> compiler could do something to create a smaller, compressed version
> of the specification that it would read in instead of reading the
> original source.)  So whatever good reasons there might be for GNAT
> to default to a particular case convention, saving disk read time
> probably isn't a valid reason.
> 
It may well be the other way round. In a library model, you keep the
same information (about specs) in the form of tables, and it is not
obvious that they use less space than the source form.


-- 
J-P. Rosen
Adalog
2 rue du Docteur Lombard, 92441 Issy-les-Moulineaux CEDEX
Tel: +33 1 45 29 21 52, Fax: +33 1 45 29 25 00
http://www.adalog.fr

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Adam Beneschan]

On Wednesday, March 6, 2013 1:01:27 PM UTC-8, J-P. Rosen wrote:
> Le 06/03/2013 18:08, Adam Beneschan a écrit :

> > Anyway, though, my feeling is that once one has chosen to build a
> > "source model" compiler--which means, if I understand it correctly,
> > that if you WITH a package then the compiler has to read the original
> > source of the WITH'ed package specification--then one has already
> > decided that disk access time isn't an issue.  (If it were, the
> > compiler could do something to create a smaller, compressed version
> > of the specification that it would read in instead of reading the
> > original source.)  So whatever good reasons there might be for GNAT
> > to default to a particular case convention, saving disk read time
> > probably isn't a valid reason.
> 
> It may well be the other way round. In a library model, you keep the
> same information (about specs) in the form of tables, and it is not
> obvious that they use less space than the source form.

If you keep *all* information about spec declarations in the library file, including information that isn't explicitly in the source file but that the compiler fills in itself, you may be right.  But that isn't what I said.  Clearly, the compiler could create a representation of a source specification that includes only the important information that already exists in the source file, and store it in a way that's much smaller than the original source.  I suppose that you could still call this a "source model", since the file would still be in some sense a representation of the original source, without any additional semantic information.  But as far as I know, GNAT doesn't do anything like that.  As far as I know, it rereads the original source of every package you've WITH'ed, including all the comments.  (Again, someone please correct me if I'm wrong; but if GNAT creates any kind of 
stripped-down version of the original source, I haven't seen it.)  This doesn't sound like an implementation that makes decisions based on saving disk access time.

                         -- Adam

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Simon Wright]

Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com> writes:

> Is it a deal-breaker for users of unix/linux? (It seems rather
> counter-intuitive to the case-insensitivity of Ada.)

It is pretty much a deal-breaker.

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Shark8]

On Monday, March 4, 2013 1:12:05 AM UTC-7, Simon Wright wrote:
> Shark8 <onewingedshark@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Is it a deal-breaker for users of unix/linux? (It seems rather
> > counter-intuitive to the case-insensitivity of Ada.)
> 
> It is pretty much a deal-breaker.

Ah, another reason to hate Linux.
(I'll convert to all lower-case names... though you have to admit all upper-cased is more computer-stylish [as in having the style associated with (older) computers].)

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Jerry]

PLplot is a cross-platform, high-quality linkable graphics library for making a variety of 2D and 3D plots including standard x-y plots, semi-log plots, log-log plots, contour plots, 3D surface plots, mesh plots, bar charts and pie charts. The library is written in C but the distribution includes Ada bindings--one thin binding and two thick bindings. Several languages are supported and output can be to a large number of interactive devices and files. Plots are made using user data stored in RAM and so can be much faster than plotters that use a disk file as an intermediary between the user program and the plot.

http://plplot.sourceforge.net/

Jerry

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[mockturtle]

This is a small thing, but I like it (maybe because I am the author? :-)

Library GCLP is a Generic Command Line Parser

     https://launchpad.net/gclp


On Sunday, March 3, 2013 5:42:44 PM UTC+1, ferra...@gmail.com wrote:
> This thread is a spin-off of another thread (see https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.ada/aMPop0FJKfM).
> 
> 
> 
> Please list here all the Ada libraries you know, with links and a brief description.
> 
> 
> 
> The final outcome should be a more or less comprehensive list of the available Ada libraries.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[Björn Persson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 289 bytes --]

mockturtle wrote:
> Library GCLP is a Generic Command Line Parser
> 
>      https://launchpad.net/gclp

Hmm, apparently I've been too quiet about Orto, the command line
parameter handler I contributed to AdaCL:

http://adacl.sourceforge.net/pmwiki.php/Main/Orto

Björn Persson

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

Re: Please list all the Ada libraries you know

[slos]

Le dimanche 3 mars 2013 17:42:44 UTC+1, ferra...@gmail.com a écrit :
> This thread is a spin-off of another thread (see https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.ada/aMPop0FJKfM).
> 
> 
> 
> Please list here all the Ada libraries you know, with links and a brief description.
> 
> 
> 
> The final outcome should be a more or less comprehensive list of the available Ada libraries.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks

Well, I will jump in the train though my project is a little young thing.

The documentation is in French but the code is in English.

When I will be tired of Ada coding and French documenting I will have a try at English documenting. But my skills in English are almost as weak as my Ada skills. Don't be cruel !

So, the goal is to create and Ada framework for Automation and one can grab the sources here :
https://gitorious.org/ada-for-automation

The project page is there, in French, sorry :
http://slo-ist.fr/ada4autom

Best Regards,
Stéphane