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: 2001-12-18 15:01:29 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn4feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.204!attbi_feed4!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc54.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Mark Lundquist" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <9v57u1$mfb$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9v74ov014bc@drn.newsguy.com> <9vb24v$7fg$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9vdo2a$9h3$1@nh.pace.co.uk> Subject: Re: Future with Ada X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:01:28 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.127.202.215 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc54 1008716488 204.127.202.215 (Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:01:28 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:01:28 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18076 Date: 2001-12-18T23:01:28+00:00 List-Id: "Marin David Condic" wrote in message news:9vdo2a$9h3$1@nh.pace.co.uk... > > The problem is that most of the real big leverage items start to become > things that intersect with the OS or machine peculiarities. I could imagine > things like a GUI, file management stuff, networking, etc., all being much > more useful than data structures and math, but then there is some question > about how it could be done in such a way as to be "standard" yet not end up > unimplementable (or simply difficult to implement) on most platforms where > the capabilities exist. If a foundation library included some of those things, and they were (a) optional, and (b) straightforward to implement on both Unix and Windows, then I wouldn't lose too much sleep over the other platforms. > > So I could see concentrating on the kinds of "under the hood" features you > mention as A Good Start. But would that alone make Ada competitive with > MSVC++ or Java? It'd be an important step in the right direction, especially for implementers who appreciate the strengths of Ada but are realistic about the state of affairs regarding GUIs and IDEs. For them, some more beef in the "under-the-hood" area might tip the scales in the scenario of "backend/engine in Ada, UI in Java" (or UI in VC++ if a different team's doing it and that's what they know), or for web development where the UI is one of the web scripting languages. Let's not equivocate on the subject under consideration, which is libraries... while IDEs are important, and also part of the "total package" along with libraries, we should still observe a separation of concerns between them. So the aim of a library effort would be to make Ada more competetive with C++/STL, and also more competetive with Java+JFC modulo the GUI issue (on that score, Ada and C++ are on a par anyway; that is to say, you can develop using Claw, Gwindows etc. on Windows and be using the same GUI as if you were writing in C++, and if you use Gtk on Linux with C++, you might just as well use GtkAda). Best, mark -------------- Reply by email to: Mark dot Lundquist at ACM dot org Consulting services: http://home.attbi.com/~mlundquist2/consulting