Re: Standard Library Interest?

[Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>]

Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com> wrote:
:  I refuse to maintain two environments (One to 
: compile some math library and the other to compile the Ada that bound to 
: it. Where does that end?)

In the real world? After all, afaik, most compilers don't run on
bare hardware, so having to maintain an OS, using non-Ada system
libraries, is not uncommon? As is using and files, and a repository,
and compilation options, and cross compilers, and version changes,
and so on... So using one or more additional libraries of the BLAS
kind might add little more than O(n) complexity, when changes
in your Ada setup do not affect your Fortran setup.

: request: That there be a *standard* Ada library.

In a way, the BLAS is certainly a most venerable "standard", with
reference implementation, published theory and source code, and
with implementations tuned to a number of processors.  Luckily,
Ada does have a standard interface to Fortran.  BLAS, typically
written in Fortran, is well tested and well documented. So, to me,
turning it down in favour of a reinvented all Ada solution smells
a bit of NIH :-)


: "One Stop Shopping" ought to be the goal along with "It 
: works right out of the box" and "They all look the same."

A nice dream, indeed :-) but I think it is more effective to strive
for a solution that can be adapted to real world conditions in a
standard way, such as is the case with Interfaces.*.
Is there more than a limited set of software components
that lend themselves well to standard Ada "adapters"?

: Or I could just go get Java or C++ and utilize whatever I can get from 
: there... :-)

Gossip notwithstanding, the situation in Java is not that different:
What libraries are available, and supported, for Java, _the language_?
Containers, I/O, XML, access control, and what else?
How about C++, the language?

-- Georg