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: 103376,7d608a55f7b2e640
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Call for ACE participation
Date: 1996/10/15
Message-ID: <dewar.845433836@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 189732083
references: <1996Oct8.194417.16693@ocsystems.com> <1996Oct15.161554.1@eisner>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-10-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Larry said

"Is this Working Group likely to have anything better to choose from,
or are we condemned to live with bindings which do not offer the full
power of Ada for a long time?"

Thick bindings have to be built on top of thin bindings in any case.
For many purposes thin bindings are far preferable to thick bindings.
Ultimately we perhaps need both, but reliastically, we will have only
thin bindings for many applications.