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,ce0900b60ca3f616
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-03 16:44:03 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!130.133.1.3!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ppp-1-90.cvx1.telinco.NET!not-for-mail
From: "Nick Roberts" <nickroberts@adaos.worldonline.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: List container strawman
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 00:10:37 -0000
Message-ID: <9s230h$107b5a$4@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de>
References: <kPoE7.9567$xS6.13287@www.newsranger.com>
 <9rubqc$i1u$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <JMyE7.10064$xS6.13823@www.newsranger.com>
 <9rueje$j69$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <j8AE7.10206$xS6.13935@www.newsranger.com>
 <9ruk02$lft$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-1-90.cvx1.telinco.net (212.1.136.90)
X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1004834641 33795242 212.1.136.90 (16 [25716])
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15755
Date: 2001-11-04T00:10:37+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

I tried to kick start the Ada Structured Component Library (ASCL) group more
than a year ago, on eGroups, but weirdly I seemed to get a pile of interest
which fizzled out as fast as it arrived. Very odd.

Anyway, I am interested!

--
Nick Roberts


"Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> wrote in
message news:9ruk02$lft$1@nh.pace.co.uk...
> I think we're clear that this is a group-consensus effort to at least see
> what sort of requirements people have for such a library. So far, we're at
> least kicking around some concrete ideas, which IMHO is a good thing.
>
> I know we've got a couple of BC fans here & if there was a consensus to
> accept that, I'd get on board, so maybe its still an idea worth kicking
> around. But I can understand and agree with the objection that it is not
as
> simple and straightforward as one might like. Is there any way we might
> identify interested parties and get a straw-poll on it? Any chance the
> vendors would likely get on board?