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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,be23df8e7e275d73 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-02 02:52:10 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed1.bredband.com!bredband!news.tele.dk!193.174.75.178!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail From: Georg Bauhaus Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Proving Correctness (was Java Portability) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:52:09 +0000 (UTC) Organization: GMUGHDU Message-ID: <9kb7s9$hr3$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> References: <1Zu77.187$EF5.315498@nnrp1.proxad.net> <9jp5eo$e2b$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <9jrdl3$mh2$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <%hb87.917$%w2.3730577@nnrp3.proxad.net> <9jrt62$38t$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B619A6D.5DD6E782@home.com> <3B6636BA.96FD8348@home.com> <9k6aug$mtq$1@nh.pace.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 996745929 18275 134.91.4.34 (2 Aug 2001 09:52:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:52:09 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00 (9000/800)) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11060 Date: 2001-08-02T09:52:09+00:00 List-Id: nicolas wrote: : "Marin David Condic" a ?crit dans : le message news: 9k6aug$mtq$1@nh.pace.co.uk... : Where are the library components, reuse etc ... ? You're not seriously asking this? : Some Ada fans seems to deny that, without having written a single big enough : Windows application, meeting interface requirements of a normal PC user. : They should really try to start from scratch a simple graphical Windows : application : really with nothing more that what comes with their compiler, not using : other tools they spent monthes to find or write themselves. 'Monthes' is by far an order of magnitude too large for the time it took me. As always, if you start at http://www.adapower.com... : I bet any Java debutant can provide a working application before they have : made the choice of their GUI ... Choosing a GUI is a time consuming procedure if you choose not by taste, fashion, prestige, or hearsay, but by comparison, reading docs, feature lists, about extensibility, integration with 3rd party tools, etc. So that only shows that IDE can be complex, despite marketing departement efforts to make it look easy, geared towards the momentarily lazy, wishfully thinking programmer.. (side note: given many approaches to GUIs, it is a question whether the choice of "standard" Windows applications (a very time dependent term in the Windows world :-) is appropriate for each and every job. See non-standard, but heavily used mail clients for an example. (And the ever changing mouse interface to system administration tasks drives Administrators crazy. I've been told you can get a nice text driven programmable interface form M$ for some $$$$. :-) : The first thing to do, is starting to aknowledge that people using popular : languages are not completely stupid, that their concerns are valid ones, Yes, valid, but not technical ones for the most part, if you accept that multi language programs are a reality. As you implied, it took someone time to find libraries, you find it inconvenient to not be given beforehand what you might be after, and more. Indeed if you can chose your tool collection from various providers, there might be some work ahead, like configuring a more recent GTK+ in a non-standard directory, if necessary, say. Tedious. An alternative is an all-in-one solution from one provider, most likely M$. Good for quick hacks, and one time products, but, to stress the term "standard" in M$ universe, for investment in long term projects? All these are convenience concerns, aren't they. : that there is absolutely no valid reason to miss basic standard tools. Could you define this term, please? WRT to GUI, there is good and valid reason on the ground of user interface research (which is an activity not constrained to the current Windows GUI or to computer science), and it is done, see touch screens in shops or train stations. They may or may not be windows like. If you restrict Ada programs to "standard Windows applications" and base your observations cencerning Ada programming environments on this, this isn't really a broad base for you arguments? -- Georg