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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c30d9137a672c74d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Ada95 for Windows 95 Reviewers Wanted Date: 1996/03/26 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 144337520 references: <01BB15A1.A55A5820@janusada.msn.fullfeed.com> <4ivkd2$gkp@azure.dstc.edu.au> <4j82te$2am@azure.dstc.edu.au> organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-03-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: "OTOH, if RR's bindings are "good" or even "half-way good", they could and possibly should serve as an interim defacto standard." I actually think that by FAR the mor important issue is to have a relatively widely implemented thin binding. This is what tool vendors need, Relatively few programs these days are written by making direct calls to the X or windows interface, instead GUI's are built with high level tools. It is these tools that need porting to Ada, and for that purpose a well designed, universally implemented thin binding is what is needed. The intermetrics bindings are intended as a candidate for this purpose.