Re: why not

["Pat Rogers" <progers@classwide.com>]

"Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> wrote in
message news:9qhiqr$af0$1@nh.pace.co.uk...
> I would again make the appeal that this would constitute "A Good Start"
and
> would satisfy a really large percentage of the practical usage. So long as
> the requirements identify the plain vanilla case and that much is agreed
on,
> implemented and accepted as the de facto "standard" we could all all the
> exceptional cases as it becomes apparent that they are needed/useful.
>
> Just so long as the structure of the component library lends itself to
> adding the extensions, it would be fine to start with a smaller set just
to
> get it going.

I would argue that the BC's are fine for all the above, they exist already,
and they work.


> BTW: Has anybody inquired with ACT, Aonix, RR, et alia, to determine if
they
> would have any interest in distributing a component library of any sort?

I'm pursuing this, and wil post when I find something out.

> Any vendors reading this who would care to comment?

Team Ada may be the way to go.  I'll post there next.


--
---
Patrick Rogers                       Consulting and Training in:
http://www.classwide.com          Real-Time/OO Languages
progers@classwide.com               Hard Deadline Schedulability Analysis
(281)648-3165                                 Software Fault Tolerance