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,fe7b178ffa3708a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-25 18:51:16 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!wn11feed!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!sccrnsc02.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Jeff C," Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <657ea3e3.0309250705.3537b0b0@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: Omission in the Ada Standard X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.31.4.164 X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-Trace: sccrnsc02 1064541072 66.31.4.164 (Fri, 26 Sep 2003 01:51:12 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 01:51:12 GMT Organization: Comcast Online Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 01:51:16 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42954 Date: 2003-09-26T01:51:16+00:00 List-Id: "Robert C. Leif" wrote in message news:657ea3e3.0309250705.3537b0b0@posting.google.com... > While I was working on my latest project, the CellFuge, I was shocked > to learn that Jerry van Dijk's Io_Ports package that I have did not > compile with GNAT. I do need an up to date version. Since the Intel > Pentium class of processors and their clones are a very large part of > the software market, the possibility of port based IO should be A few notes... First....this is not in any language standard...So Ada would be the only language to support it. Second...Code that accesses the ports directly is now obsolete (mostly) since it is not legal under NT, 2000, XP (although there are some way to simulate it this is another area where no compiler (including the VC++) allows you to do this out of the box. Third...What this really points out is not so much a problem with the Ada standard as much as a problem with providing standard platform specific libraries. It has always seemed to me to be a shame that there is no good standardization for platform specific libraries in Ada. (i.e. a standard way of getting access to Altivec extensions for PowerPC or a standard way of doing what you are asking for).. So, while I don't think it is appropriate to say these features are missing from the language standard I do think that a better job could be done with standard libraries. I think what prevents it is not having one dominant Monopoly like microsoft for Ada "setting the standard" such that other vendors feel they are required to be compatible.