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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-27 21:37:24 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsxfer.eecs.umich.edu!news.cc.ukans.edu!stl-feed.news.verio.net!newsreader.wustl.edu!unlnews.unl.edu!newsfeed.ksu.edu!nntp.ksu.edu!news.okstate.edu!not-for-mail From: David Starner Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Progress on AdaOS Date: 28 Aug 2001 01:51:52 GMT Organization: Oklahoma State University Message-ID: <9metfo$aai2@news.cis.okstate.edu> References: <9IFe7.12813$6R6.1221214@news1.cableinet.net> <9lghqu$ac6$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B7C3293.76F49097@home.com> <9lhefg$lgd$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B7D47F1.25D6FC78@boeing.com> <5ee5b646.0108171856.18631c4c@posting.google.com> <3B7F624B.7294D24F@acm.org> <9lr6je$5hj$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9ltoi7$4is$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B82789B.8D195045@home.com> <9ltuo8$70n$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B829450.879B0396@home.com> <9mdh4e$q3v$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9me03r$c302@news.cis.okstate.edu> <3B8AB6C8.910130C8@san.rr.com> Reply-To: dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org NNTP-Posting-Host: x8b4e5129.dhcp.okstate.edu User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.2 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12500 Date: 2001-08-28T01:51:52+00:00 List-Id: On Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:08:27 GMT, Darren New wrote: > For example, it starts off with an assumption that files are named > entities, buckets of bits that need interpretation by disassociated > program code. This isn't true of "objects" in the OO sense, nor is it > true of processes, nor is it true of RPCs. That would be why objects, processes and RPCs aren't files. > If there were an AdaOS that didn't allow one to declare a passive > partition and say "Hey, this is the data", I'd be disappointed. Why > *can't* my "file" have a directed acyclic graph of tagged records > holding access values in it? An OS could certainly flatten that into a file. It would probably take a lot of work to make sure it wasn't an OS/program/libada specific file, though. >> Everything can viewed as raw data. > > Well, no. Only if you come from the Unix/Windows/CPM world. (Not even > there, actually. What's the "raw data" in the superblock? In a > directory? In a network-mounted partition?) Those aren't files. However, the fact that /dev/hda (Hard drive 1) could be viewed as a file was a life saver for me. After I wiped out my partition table, I managed to retrive the text on that partition with the strings utility. > Those of us who had the privledge of (for example) using ISAM files so > you could actually insert a line of text at the beginning of your file > without rewriting the whole file can tell you that not everything is raw > data. :-) When is that much of a win? I don't play around with files large enough for this to matter very often. >> Then we have >> for example, types text, image, video, audio, program, data and >> text/utf8, text/utf8/crlf, text/utf8/lf, text/utf8/psls, image/png, >> image/tiff, image/tiff/lzw, data/word, data/word/7.0, etc. > > How about the type for Ada source files? Ada specification headers? Ada > bodies? text/ada or text/utf8/ada or text/utf8/foo/ada. (On second thought, dictate that all text on the system be UTF-8 with a standard line ending (LF, CRLF, PS/LS, it doesn't matter so long as it's consistent.) Then we can ignore this /utf8/foo/ stuff.) > The type for an "Active Server Page" with Ada code embedded in > HTML markup under control of CVS? text/x-asp. > And how do you determine which > programs can read such? :-) Any program that can read raw data, or text, or text/ada. I'm not sure I understand your point. These are problems for all tagged type systems, but you don't seem to want raw data either. >> So programs >> like copy can deal with them on the raw data level, > > Only in the most primitive of systems does that work. Does copy *really* > deal with transfering text files across a TCP link between a unix box > and a mac box? No, it's the device drivers. It's always the device drivers. Even in MS/DOS, copy called the OS to actually write the file. But if the mac box looks like a directory to copy, then copy copies it there, regardless of the underlying mechanism to put data in that directory. > Anyway, I'd think making a persistant Ada-typed store would be a great > file system for an Ada-based OS. Then you could have utilities to copy > Text_IO-based files to whatever internal format you wanted (such as > "editable text"). Yuck. Text_IO files should _be_ editable text. Text should be text should be text. -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org "I don't care if Bill personally has my name and reads my email and laughs at me. In fact, I'd be rather honored." - Joseph_Greg