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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,88ed72d98e6b3457 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-10 05:06:57 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!west.cox.net!east.cox.net!peer01.cox.net!cox.net!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!nwrdny01.gnilink.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "Stephane Richard" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <1065709467.623059@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> Subject: Re: Standard Library Interest? X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 12:06:56 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.44.78.7 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: nwrdny01.gnilink.net 1065787616 129.44.78.7 (Fri, 10 Oct 2003 08:06:56 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 08:06:56 EDT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:593 Date: 2003-10-10T12:06:56+00:00 List-Id: > By the way, C++ cognoscenti are addressing similar library issues. > The complaints are the same - we need more libraries because > (insert: Java, C#, Windows, etc.) has them and we're falling behind, > and trying to get them into the standard is too slow. > > There's already a central site which is focusing on being the place > where proposed libraries live, . It might be > fruitful to read through it to see how their policies work. > I just took a look at it, and I'd say you're right, it's worth looking into. Mix in Ada Style And quality for coding style, create our own hierarchy of libraries because their idea is pretty good, I for one would use a different "classification" approach to the library, one that reflects the Ada Style and quality. But as far as processes go (reviewing of libraries, different steps to get a idea into a usabe/reusable stable library state) their approach seems pretty good. Perhaps we can borrow a few tips and tricks. As for how I'd see the "classification" process? As I mentionned previously, somewhat of a taxonomy chart of libraries (which could and would represent object dependancies, agretations, containments within each other) would be good in my book. As a basis of course, the means to search the hierarchy could be from anything to anything as in, keyword searches, library type search, named searches, anything at all. and those search mechanisms could grow as we find ways to search "intelligently" through the hierarchy or get demands to search by this or that criteria. -- St�phane Richard "Ada World" Webmaster http://www.adaworld.com