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, LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f51e93dacd9c7fca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-09-29 11:02:57 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed.stueberl.de!cox.net!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!harp.news.atl.earthlink.net!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: status of Ada STL? Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 14:02:20 -0400 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Message-ID: References: <3d0f0c40_1@news.tm.net.my> NNTP-Posting-Host: d1.56.b5.f1 X-Server-Date: 29 Sep 2002 18:02:58 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:29413 Date: 2002-09-29T18:02:58+00:00 List-Id: Pat Rogers wrote in message news:Mmjl9.38563$jw6.533609596@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com... > > Just so, as we've discussed before, because supplying it means they > have to support it. > I understand that aspect - they don't want to increase the level of effort to maintain something unless there is some demand out there. It seems though that perhaps instead of waiting for a groundswell of demand it might be wiser to actually try to drive it from in front. Get a preliminary agreement between the interested parties that some specific thing *might* be the right answer, then go out and try to sell it. "We vendors kind of agree that a library sort of like this might be a good idea. Is that worth something to you if we made it a priority? What would you give up in exchange for making it a priority?" Given the traffic on this subject here in the past, I don't find it difficult to believe that there is a significant demand for *some* library to exist - the problem seems to be one of who is going to say what that library is. > > (Hint: If you are a paying customer, send an e-mail to your sales or > > customer support weenies indicating what you would prefer.) > > Good idea. I think it is the only way it will happen. > If demand is perceived, they'll make something happen. So for those with contracts and an interest in libraries, start creating the demand. > > Otherwise, we can wait for Ada0x since I'm sure something will be in > it by > > then. > > Is there reason to think so? :-( > I think there is a good likelihood that Ada0x will have some kind of library in it. I don't know that waiting for something to get in the standard is a good thing. First off, whatever eventually *does* end up in the standard, it will most likely be very limited in scope. Its just too darned hard to get any truly extensive thing into the standard given the need for validation, etc. So maybe you'll see some limited containers in there and maybe some support for OS interfacing. But consider that most of the folks driving the standard really want stability and lack of new required effort on their part, so they've got an incentive to exclude as much as they can from getting in there. That's why it would be better to have some mechanism to get a reference implementation built & give it to the vendors. A reference implementation of something can get as big and glorious as it wants and it requires much less from the vendors than sticking something into the standard. They can provide it with all sorts of disclaimers "Use at your own risk." "No vendor serviceable parts inside." "If you want to complain - send a note to SIGAda-Library-Working-Group or someone who might actually care." If all the vendors have the same reference implementation, it doesn't change competitiveness much, but it dramatically increases the value of Ada to those not using it as of yet. Its quite all right if the Ada community wants to wait until Ada0x to include some libraries for containers and whatnot. After all, the Ada community waited until Ada95 to provide sqrt and log functions and the folks who had to do numeric programming between 83 and 95 had a workaround - use Fortran, C or C++. (Oh, but you can always bind to those libraries! :-) If the Ada community doesn't want to create libraries to help developers leverage their effort, I'm sure the folks starting new developments can just as easily get those started in Java or C++ where they *do* already have extensive libraries. Ada can continue to provide too little, too late and the computing world can continue to adopt technologies that give them more leverage. Darwin won't shed any tears. :-) MDC -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jast.mil/ Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "I'd trade it all for just a little more" -- Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10] ======================================================================