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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac39a12d5faf5b14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-22 17:35:25 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!colt.net!diablo.netcom.net.uk!netcom.net.uk!easynet-monga!easynet.net!diablo.theplanet.net!diablo.theplanet.net!psiuk-p2!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Grace and Maps (was Re: Development process in the Ada community) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 09:40:33 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: References: <3CB46975.90408@snafu.de> <3CBAFFEE.2080708@snafu.de> <4519e058.0204171036.6f0a7394@posting.google.com> <3CBDD795.4060706@snafu.de> <4519e058.0204180800.44fac012@posting.google.com> <3CBF0341.8020406@mail.com> <4519e058.0204190529.559a47ae@posting.google.com> <3CC1BD77.EFDD044C@acm.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1019482835 23910 136.170.200.133 (22 Apr 2002 13:40:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 22 Apr 2002 13:40:35 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22943 Date: 2002-04-22T13:40:35+00:00 List-Id: "Jeffrey Carter" wrote in message news:3CC1BD77.EFDD044C@acm.org... > > No, it wouldn't be fair, at least not from my perspective. But it would > be a good start, so I have no objection to it. > Note that the question is more one about generality. I certainly accept that there *are* people who use Ada in realtime apps where performance & determinism & possibly task safety would be a critical concern. Just more of an issue of "who is in the majority" so we can do the Greatest Good For The Greatest Number. (Also, I don't think that the Grace list package as it stands at the moment wouldn't be useful in realtime - just that it might not be applicable without careful analysis & for a number of cases, fixed or bounded versions might be better. They can always be added if there seems to be a crying need.) > > While I agree with this, if Grace becomes accepted, and we submit it to > the ARG as has been requested on the Ada-Comment mailing list, then it > would become part of the Ada.* hierarchy, so I suggest that consistency > with those naming conventions would be a Good Thing. > I'd actually be opposed to getting it into the Ada.* tree. A couple of reasons: First, this is going to exist as a stand alone tree initially because you can't add it to the Ada.* tree without being the compiler. Once it starts showing up in people's code as "Grace.Lists..." nobody is going to want to go change their existing code to make it all "Ada.Grace.Lists...." My experience with software is that early decisions about structure are something you have to live with for a very long time, so you'd better consider them carefully. My second reason is that if this collection of stuff should ever get put under the Ada.* tree, you would instantly make it very difficult to extend and enhance with future ideas. You'd be up against the inability to modify anything in the Ada.* tree without being the compiler, plus you'd be up against all sorts of political forces lobbying for stability and fighting against an ISO bureaucracy, etc. etc. etc. Far better it should stand on its own so that it can be treated as a "Convention" rather than a "Standard" and remain far more flexible & extensible. A library such as this needs to be enhanced with a fairly rapid product cycle or we would be lagging behind other languages instead of taking the lead. That's my take on it anyway. It would be good to know what the rest of the interested parties think on it - should Grace aim for inclusion in the Ada.* tree and become part of the ARM? (Can it be part of the ARM and remain flexible with a fast update cycle?) Or should it aim to be a sideline convention? MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com