From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 11 Jun 93 14:09:48 GMT From: emery@mitre-bedford.arpa (David Emery) Subject: MS-Windows compiler review and Ada 'myopia' Message-ID: List-Id: The latest issue of IEEE Computer (June 93, pp 108-111) has a review of two Ada compilers (Meridian and Janus). The author, Frank Pappas, complained about the Windows API thin bindings included with the two compilers. He said, "...I think it was a mistake for [the compiler vendors] to hav deefined their own interfaces. What's needed is a common, high-level Ada binding for Windows, which will probably come about only if someone at the Department of Defense is willing to pay for it - something that should be done soon!" Well, I have several problems with this. As Mike Feldman and Greg Aharonian, among others, have pointed out, a problem with the Ada business is that they seem to wait for the DoD to pay for everything. I agree that a 'common' MS-Windows API binding would be a very good thing, but I don't think that we should sit back and wait until "Uncle Sugar" pays for it. If there's sufficient interest, then certainly the vendors and interested users can get together and develop a 'standard' Windows Ada binding. I'm sure that ACM SIGAda would be willing to sponsor a working group to facilitate this discussion (although ACM does not develop standards, so the 'product' of such a group would need some other mechanism for formal standardization.) Besides, I don't agree that it is in the DoD's interests to fund the Ada binding to MS-Windows. Windows is a very proprietary API, owned by MicroSoft. The current DoD trend is away from such proprietary interfaces, and towards open, standard interfaces. I think it is much more appropriate (and important) for DoD to sponsor X Windows, etc. bindings, and in particular a binding to IEEE draft 1295.1 (MOTIF). With respect to MS-Windows, it'll be interesting to watch the Sun effort to develop a 'standard' Windows API that is not proprietary to MicroSoft. dave