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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,842accb6a7d76669 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-11 08:02:14 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: List container strawman 1.1 Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 10:39:22 -0500 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9sm62v$3jb$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <3BE301D1.4010106@telepath.com> <3BE7DA00.8020807@acm.org> <9sdojl$e6h$1@news.huji.ac.il> <3BEACA5A.9030100@acm.org> <20TG7.18929$xS6.30469@www.newsranger.com> <9sh49o$ohc$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9shlbg$nu1$1@news.huji.ac.il> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1005493151 3691 136.170.200.133 (11 Nov 2001 15:39:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Nov 2001 15:39:11 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16279 Date: 2001-11-11T15:39:11+00:00 List-Id: If for no other reason, I offer these: The BC's seem to have a certain amount of following already and hence a possible constituency to lobby for it and a willingness to go along with it - hence some likelyhood that we will actually get an agreement and something will result from this. Also, the fact that it already exists is a plus - an advantage shared by some other component libraries as well. I have no problem adopting something that already exists and has some consensus that this is one of many possible "Right Answers." I also don't have a problem if everybody agrees to build a component library from bottom-dead-center. What I'd prefer to avoid is a never-ending discussion about what constitutes the "Right Answer" such that we never see an end product out of it. If supporting an existing component library (with some modification/extension?) gets us moving along, I'd accept a less than optimal answer. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Ehud Lamm" wrote in message news:9shlbg$nu1$1@news.huji.ac.il... > > But one must ask, WHY the BC? Other have their own favorites, which may be > better. > The problem is that analyzing large libraries trying to find the "best" one > to start with, and trying to remove dependencies with code that may be best > left out, seems even less appealing than designing from scratch... >