Re: RE: rename missing in Text_IO

["Marin David Condic" <marin.condic.auntie.spam@pacemicro.com>]

Since the discussion started concerning Win32ada simply having way too many
types and way too much C-ish feeling to the parameter lists, etc., my
original idea was to put a relatively simple layer on top of Win32ada. Just
enough so that when a string was called for, you used an Ada string - not
some 2nd or 3rd layer subtype of a pointer to a char - or other equally
unfriendly examples. I wouldn't want to consolidate multiple calls into
single calls or significantly change anything about the interface - so far
as it could be avoided. Just Ada-ize what one sees when one uses the
Win32api. (Some compromises are in order - you'd want to change all the
numeric return statuses into something more Ada-ish like enumerations.
Again, its a question of where does one stop?)

To that end, I'd think that Claw exceeds the spec. Claw is a perfectly fine
tool and one might be quite happy to develop on top of it. I'd think that
there would remain times when one would simply want to get at a single
Win32api call without any other layers of abstraction beyond making the
thing not quite so agonizing to use from an Ada perspective.

Claw may be a better answer for overall development, but I was kind of
thinking along the lines of something that would be freely available as a
blanket over the Win32ada binding. Sort of a "binding to a binding". (Now we
could start the GPL vs LGPL vs GMGPL debate along a whole new thread! :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


<tmoran@acm.org> wrote in message
news:mLKJ6.43239$Jh5.41288199@news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com...
> >Where do you want to draw the line and say "This far and no farther?"
>   Perhaps Claw defines what's beyond the line?