Re: Thinking of using Ada for a job at home. Couple of questions first.

[Warren Gay <ve3wwg@gmail.com>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1552 bytes --]

John McCabe expounded in news:kv6vo5d48def3ptdou0r2nndu03nsittp8@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 07:22:34 +0100, Hibou57 (Yannick Duch�ne)
> <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> 
>>Le Wed, 03 Mar 2010 21:17:12 +0100, John McCabe  
>><john@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk.nospam> a �crit:
>>> I've found a library
>>> called libjdkmidi that, if it would look easier to bind to than 
direct
>>> to Win32's mmsystem functions, might be worth doing.
>>Keep in mind it's a C++ library, not Ada
> 
> Of course, as otherwise I wouldn't need to bind to it!

This is the one main issue that made me give up on Ada a few
years back. It seemed that every project that I wanted
to do, required me to create a "binding" for this and 
another for that. Sing "It's a C/C++ world after all". 

But I miss designing in Ada, to be sure.

So I keep coming back to the same problem:

  * How can this be solved?

One approach would be open sourced "binding" projects for
the platforms of choice. I started APQ for example, to 
scratch just one itch. But binding projects are tedious.

Another approach might be to create a "binding translator". 
Feed a C/C++ preprocessed output into the translator and 
crank out some ugly but functional package(s). 

The later approach would help on the portability front. Then if 
I have a project that must run on almost any POSIX platform, then
the make process can run the translator on the appropriate
"files" and produce a local platform specific Ada binding.

This approach is probably naive, but I can't help
wish for it.

Warren