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: 103376,1563af5c167aacf2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-19 13:26:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!nntp.flash.net!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr14.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!3bae8248!not-for-mail From: tmoran@acm.org Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: thick? thin? binding References: X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.112.203.22 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr14.news.prodigy.com 1024518345 ST000 67.112.203.22 (Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:25:45 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:25:45 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: Q[R_PJONAJUMB_LY@BCBNWX@RJ_XPDLMN@GZ_GYO^JWTEPIB_NVUAH_[BL[\IRKIANGGJBFNJF_DOLSCENSY^U@FRFUEXR@KFXYDBPWBCDQJA@X_DCBHXR[C@\EOKCJLED_SZ@RMWYXYWE_P@\\GOIW^@SYFFSWHFIXMADO@^[ADPRPETLBJ]RDGENSKQQZN Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 20:25:45 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26435 Date: 2002-06-19T20:25:45+00:00 List-Id: > So the MFC is a thick binding from Win32-C-API to C++ ? :-) Yes. > This also means thick binding is better but slower. It means it gains the usual Ada benefits, and it usually means it's at a higher abstraction level, but the additional overhead is usually swamped by the time spent inside Windows (or whatever) system calls. Most of a Windows binding is to IO - especially human speed GUI IO - which is slow anyway.