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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,92c39a3be0a7f17d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-17 08:29:28 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!iad-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!bpr.best.vwh.net!bpr Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: Brian Rogoff Subject: Re: Future with Ada In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <9v57u1$mfb$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9v74ov014bc@drn.newsguy.com> <9vb24v$7fg$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9vdp9f$9vo$1@nh.pace.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:29:23 +0000 NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.220.65.223 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 1008606538 192.220.65.223 (Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:28:58 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 16:28:58 GMT Organization: Verio Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18010 Date: 2001-12-17T16:29:23+00:00 List-Id: On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Pat Rogers wrote: > "Mark Lundquist" wrote in message > > Do you wish there were *more* people with strong opinions about these > > things? :-) Maybe I'm getting you wrong, but it seems as though you are > > saying that the people who actually care about how this stuff works are an > > obstruction to the process... :-) > > My point is not that "too many cooks spoil the soup", although I believe > that apllies here too, but rather that the cooks will argue amongst > themselves endlessly (about what to name their dishes for example) while the > customers "starve". (Excuse the hyperbole.:) A nice short way to express this situation is "analysis paralysis". The solution is the Nike approach, "just do it". > > With all respect, I feel this is a cop-out. I firmly believe that an Ada > > foundation library with collections (and more), with which everybody > *will* > > be genuinely pleased, *can* be written. It just has not been -- yet. > > I'm speaking from personal experience -- YMMV -- when I submit that a > universally accepted library that pleases everyone will not happen. (Of > course I don't mean that I will not like it, therefore it will not be > "universal". :) I agree entirely with Pat here. Such an Ada library cannot be written, as some people have contradicting beliefs/desires about such a library. > > > So let's pick one and as a group start asking the > > > vendors to provide them. We have reason to believe the vendors will > > > respond. A better idea IMO would be to pick a few, whip them into shape (make sure they're portable to a few compilers, well enough documented, etc.) and just let people use them, or not. Hopefully vendors could provide something like an Ada Developers Kit with these libraries and more. > > I must say that I'm quite opposed to the "pick one and go with it idea", > and > > I really wish that you would reconsider recommending it. I think we can > do > > better than that, and that's what some of us here are trying to do. > > Then I hope I am wrong. I don't think you are. Remmeber there was another waste of time effort in this direction a few years ago, too. -- Brian