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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3283a610ea0294f5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: jsa@alexandria.organon.com (Jon S Anthony)
Subject: Re: What's Pure for Dist Sytems?
Date: 1997/06/19
Message-ID: <JSA.97Jun19182903@alexandria.organon.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 251195837
Distribution: world
References: <5oa5ol$8vv$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
 <x2pvtianx1.fsf@inf.fu-berlin.de>
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-06-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <x2pvtianx1.fsf@inf.fu-berlin.de> Andre Spiegel <spiegel@inf.fu-berlin.de> writes:

> > I was especially upset at the restriction of no {un}bounded strings.
> 
> > Is there anything that i'm missing here?
> 
> There is a proposal to add pragma Remote_Types to some of the
> predefined packages (see Ada Issue ai-00126, at
> http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/standards/95com/ada-issues/).
> 
> However, even under this proposal, Ada.Strings.Bounded and
> Ada.Strings.Unbounded are still non-remote.  I find this an
> intolerable restriction, too, and I wonder if anyone sets out to
> remedy this...

Use CORBA?  The Ada=>IDL mapping fully supports this sort of thing.

/Jon
-- 
Jon Anthony
OMI, Belmont, MA 02178
617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha!  The way my life's been going lately,
 Who'd notice?"  -- Londo Mollari