Re: Standard Library Interest? (The Big Player IRVINE)

["Stephane Richard" <stephane.richard@verizon.net>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3288 bytes --]

Irvine Ada Compiler's reply to my questionnaire. (a different perspective to
say the least).

>
> 1. How open are they to the idea of the library as it seems to be
directing
> itself so far?

I am very open to the idea of a registry/catalog of existing components.
I think this will quickly lead to improvement of the components by their
own authors, as errors and non-portabilities are highlighted, and it will
quickly lead to improvements in the compilers as compiler errors are
highlighted.  This will correct one of the main current deficiencies, in
that existing components are unlikely to work on any compiler other than
the one they were developed with.

If the registry/catalog is actively maintained (more so than Adapower)
and publicized (more so than AdaIC or Sigada), it will attract
volunteers to develop new components, and volunteers to point out
the existence of missing components, and volunteer reviewers to
identify which compilers work (or don't) on which components.

Users would be much more willing to hunt for reusable components
in such a catalog, than in the existing unmaintained link farms.
This would be true, regardless of whether any of the components
were ever standardized by the ARG, or distributed by compiler
vendors, or somehow made to use a consistent coding style.

> 2. Did you, as a compiler vendor conduct any surveys or research, amongst
> your clients to see what they could possibly want in a library?

No.  Customers don't look to compiler vendors for such things.
They would rather the compiler was less expensive than that it
comes with extra goodies not required by the RM, for which they
can either write their own or find in a free library.

> 3. What would you, as compiler vendors, like to see in the
> library/registry/catalog?  As in something you might know you've never
seen
> before that is crucially missing from Ada as it stands right now.

I'd like to see all the existing Ada software cataloged in one place.
Volunteers will quickly fill in the gaps once the scope is clear.

> 4. What about more elaborate libraries that are missing when comparing Ada
> to such languages as C++, Delphi and the likes?  By this I mean to ask
what,
> according to you, is potentially missing from Ada that comes with the
other
> "popular" languages, what do you think would help Ada's popularity, so to
> speak?

I think the library would naturally evolve to be more elaborate, without
any central planning, or any involvement of the ARG or compiler vendors.

> 5. What about even more sophisticated things.  things that could entice
> other domains industries to be interested by Ada and bring new customers
and
> customer types?

Reliable, inexpensive compilers is what brings in new customers,
particularly if the capabilities of such compilers are plain to see
on a highly visible web site.


I am also awaiting replies from:

- Aonix who have agreed to participate in this survey, I'm just waiting for
the answers to this question).
- Rational Ada (who have received my questions and I'm waiting for a reply.
- Green Hills (same as Rational, awaiting the reply to the questions.  I'll
be posting them as I get them :-).

So keep on readin.  There's more to come.


-- 
St�phane Richard
"Ada World" Webmaster
http://www.adaworld.com