Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[ferrariv65]

Hello,

Ada is VERY nice, as language, but let's face it: when it comes to libraries...
Apart from the standard set of libraries (AWS, etc), there is not much else worth mentioning.
The list of available libraries at AdaPower [1] is far from being a satisfactory toolkit. Many of the listed libraries have an amateurish look, as well as being old and unmaintained. The webpage itself, which comes up as the first result when searching for "Ada libraries" with Google, is very old (look at the copyright) and shabby. I have seen better maintained webpages for toy languages. What's even more embarrassing, is that not only the webpage that came up with this first Google result is so bad, but this is about the only search result that contains useful libraries!

Honestly, if one were to judge the language from its available libraries (again: apart from the core set of libraries), the impression would be that Ada is a hobby language. When in fact it is all the opposite!
Sure, the Ada community is not as vital as the Python community, or that of other languages, but the overall situation of the libraries is really disappointing for a major language like Ada.

I may be mistaken, but it seems that all the efforts about Ada maintenance go into the language itself and in the IDE, with little consideration for the libraries. As is users were left to struggle on their own...

With all the millions of dollars that are involved in Ada projects, and the several companies and organizations involved, I am surprised that some effort has not yet been made to give Ada a more decent library kit.

I do hope you will realize that this is not a pointless rant, and that the situation must be faced. 

I believe the survival of the language is at stake here, and the pressing need for a decent library toolkit should be a serious concern for all Ada programmers. Unless you take the defeatist view that "Well, Ada is dying anyway, so, what's the point of putting so much effort in to it?", which certainly I don't take.

A concerned Ada user


[1] http://www.adapower.com/index.php?Command=Class&ClassID=AdaLibs&Title=Ada+Libraries

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)]

Le Sun, 03 Mar 2013 11:59:31 +0100, <ferrariv65@gmail.com> a écrit:


> Many of the listed libraries have an amateurish  look

First, keep in mind the are offered for free, if you want more, think of  
giving something for it to the author, which would probably be happy of  
it. Then it hearts “a bit” to read “amateurish look” here: it may be to  
your eyes, but not to someone else's eyes. The real issue is about style,  
convention and design rules. Indeed, many libraries from many authors,  
means many differences in styles, conventions and design rules, and if you  
mix all together, that will looks inconsistent. That's more a matter of  
standard. If you want consistent design, only use library from a single  
author (possibly give him/her something to get the job done if something  
looks missing to fulfil your needs), or (I know it's more easily said than  
done), write your owns, with your own consistent style and design rules.

Or may that means Ada is better suited to things to do yourself than  
looking for someone else which already did it for you :P (half‑joke which  
may be half‑true, I don't know).

-- 
“Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.” [1]
“Structured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.” [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming — Alan J. — P. Yale University

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Ludovic Brenta]

ferrariv65@gmail.com writes:
> I do hope you will realize that this is not a pointless rant, and that
> the situation must be faced.

OK. Identify one area where existing libraries are lacking then write
the missing pieces.  I'll do the packaging for Debian.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Shark8]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 6:10:41 AM UTC-7, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> ferrariv65@gmail.com writes:
> 
> > I do hope you will realize that this is not a pointless rant, and that
> > the situation must be faced.
> 
> OK. Identify one area where existing libraries are lacking then write
> the missing pieces.  I'll do the packaging for Debian.

Thanks for maintaining Debian; I'll have to pop you a line when/if I get my OpenGL binding rewritten.

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Shark8]

On Sunday, March 3, 2013 3:59:31 AM UTC-7, ferra...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> Ada is VERY nice, as language, but let's face it: when it comes to libraries...
> 
> Apart from the standard set of libraries (AWS, etc), there is not much else worth mentioning.

Oh, it's worse than that. Some of these libraries in the "standard set" are difficult [or virtually impossible] to build [in windows w/GNAT]. AWS in particular is a pain because it requires an additional subsystem [cygwin, mingw, etc] to compile and install... and even then it's very frustrating because of how chancy getting a viable build/install is. (I've only done it once, and I'm coming to be of the opinion it was by accident because I've *NEVER* been able to do so since.) {Be prepared to hand-edit the auto generated/config files! There's a whole `nother load of fun for you!}

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Simon Wright]

ferrariv65@gmail.com writes:

It's possible that the fact that the page you found is disorganised has
prevented you from finding the gems.

> The list of available libraries at AdaPower [1] is far from being a
> satisfactory toolkit. Many of the listed libraries have an amateurish
> look, as well as being old and unmaintained. The webpage itself, which
> comes up as the first result when searching for "Ada libraries" with
> Google, is very old (look at the copyright) and shabby. I have seen
> better maintained webpages for toy languages. What's even more
> embarrassing, is that not only the webpage that came up with this
> first Google result is so bad, but this is about the only search
> result that contains useful libraries!

Here, it was the third result. I agree it's not maintained well (not
maintained at all, as far as I can see); shame it's still high on
Google's ranking.

The second result from Google[1] isn't bad, especially if you go straight
to the internal link[2]; better is the fourth result[3].

AWS isn't a standard library (that is, it's not in the
standard). Instead, it's a library maintained by AdaCore. You might find
their GNAT Component Collection[4] interesting.

[1] http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming
[2] http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_Programming#External_Libraries
[3] http://www.adaic.org/ada-resources/tools-libraries/
[4] http://libre.adacore.com/tools/gnat-component-collection/

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[ferrariv65]

> It's possible that the fact that the page you found is disorganised has
> 
> prevented you from finding the gems.

Of course there are gems, but (and this is precisely my point) it is all disorganized!!
And just to clarify, my criticism was not at all directed towards the single contributors who generously give us the code here and there. The actual complaint was about the overall disarray in which the libraries, as a whole, lie. You know, lack of coordination, with libraries scattered all over the internet to the point that almost you don't even know of the existence of a library unless you come across it by chance.
One thing is the lack of uniformity across the styles of the contribution, which is already bad enough, but much worse is the fact that you don't even know whether a piece of code has already been written or not. And please, don't tell me to use Google again, because you know how much a waste of time using a search engine can be, especially when you don't have the exact keywords to search for.

I believe the first step towards a solution would be to make an updated list of all the Ada libraries, with links and a brief description, just so we know that a given piece of code is there!

I am creating a parallel thread on this topic, so that each one of us can contribute to creating this comprehensive list of Ada libraries.

In that thread, please list any Ada library you know, with a brief description.

Thanks

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[gautier_niouzes]

Le dimanche 3 mars 2013 11:59:31 UTC+1, ferra...@gmail.com a écrit :

Hello,
I share your concern, and library availability is key.
Did you look at the following site ?
http://commons.ada.cx/Category:Libraries
IIRC it is working like wikipedia.

Perhaps if you also develop the "etc." in "AWS, etc.", and reversely, what you think is typically missing, and also show some good example of library list for other languages, it would be great.

_________________________
Gautier's Ada programming
http://gautiersblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Ada
NB: follow the above link for a valid e-mail address

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)]

Le Sun, 03 Mar 2013 18:24:27 +0100, <gautier_niouzes@hotmail.com> a écrit:

> Le dimanche 3 mars 2013 11:59:31 UTC+1, ferra...@gmail.com a écrit :
>
> Hello,
> I share your concern, and library availability is key.
> Did you look at the following site ?
> http://commons.ada.cx/Category:Libraries
> IIRC it is working like wikipedia.
>

Surprisingly, you forgot that link from the home page of the main domain,  
which is http://ada.cx/ . The latter has no link to http://commons.ada.cx/  
.

-- 
“Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.” [1]
“Structured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.” [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming — Alan J. — P. Yale University

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Jacob Sparre Andersen]

ferrariv65@gmail.com wrote:

> I believe the first step towards a solution would be to make an
> updated list of all the Ada libraries, with links and a brief
> description, just so we know that a given piece of code is there!

It is wonderful how somebody comes by "comp.lang.ada" (roughly) every
four months with that ambition.

May I suggest that you submit what you find to
<http://www.adaic.org/ada-resources/tools-libraries/>.  That seems to be
the best bet so far on a long-term maintained list of Open Source
libraries for Ada programmers.

Greetings,

Jacob
-- 
"Nobody writes jokes in base 13."
 Douglas Adams

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Nasser M. Abbasi]

On 3/3/2013 4:59 AM, ferrariv65@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello,
>

> The list of available libraries at AdaPower [1] is far from being a satisfactory toolkit.

fyi;

I have a list here also (but mainly for bindings) but I also
have no updated it for sometime:

http://12000.org/my_notes/ada/original_web_page.htm

Since Ada community is much smaller than others (python, R,
C++,etc... you can't expect the same number of libraries
for Ada as those).

I also think Ada is great language. But it has limited number of libraries
to make using it practical for certain applications (for me this
will be in area of scientific/graphics/system simulation etc..)

This is sad in a way, because I think Ada is the best when it
come to reusable software components and it has the best
package system out of any other language I've seen so far. It was
designed from the ground up for re-usability.

What Ada needs is CTAN and CRAN like package repository. But
again the Ada community is very small and doing something like
CRAN for Ada will require few Ada experts full time work on
this.

We need to have the US military adopt Ada again as the only
language to use for making rockets and weapons. This is the only
way to make Ada more popular as it was in the 80's.  (did you know
that Ada was #3 most popular language on the tiobe index in 1983?

So, any chance of this happening, someone needs to call the pentagon
and talk to someone there  :)

--Nasser

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Randy Brukardt]

<ferrariv65@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:2e0253ac-b99b-4e4d-bbb9-bdf17f8359c4@googlegroups.com...

...
>I believe the first step towards a solution would be to make an updated 
>list of all the Ada libraries,
> with links and a brief description, just so we know that a given piece of 
> code is there!

Why bother, AdaIC haas such a list, which has been continuously maintained 
for 10 years. (As the maintainer, I know this!). I just reorganized and 
updated it a month or so ago, getting rid of dead projects and making it 
easier to search.

Also, I highly recommend the Ada-wide search engine 
(http://www.adaic.org/ada-resources/ada-on-the-web/), which searches known 
Ada sites (and *only* known Ada sites) for information; it's easier to use 
than Google because you don't get large amounts of irrelevant information. 
(Of course, you won't find anything not known to us, but people that don't 
post here and don't send announcements to news@adaic.com don't want to be 
found, IMHO).

                                Randy.

P.S. Volunteer efforts like AdaPower are great, but eventually the 
volunteers run out of steam and the sites become ancient. AdaHome, AdaPower, 
AdaWorld have all eventually became stale. AdaIC is run by the Ada Resource 
Association and they *pay* me to maintain it, so it gets maintained 
regularly.

Re: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?

[Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)]

Le Tue, 05 Mar 2013 00:34:13 +0100, Randy Brukardt <randy@rrsoftware.com>  
a écrit:

> <ferrariv65@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2e0253ac-b99b-4e4d-bbb9-bdf17f8359c4@googlegroups.com...
>
> ...
>> I believe the first step towards a solution would be to make an updated
>> list of all the Ada libraries,
>> with links and a brief description, just so we know that a given piece  
>> of
>> code is there!
>
> Why bother, AdaIC haas such a list,

And its location is: http://www.adaic.org/ada-resources/tools-libraries/


-- 
“Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.” [1]
“Structured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.” [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming — Alan J. — P. Yale University

Suggestion for publishers of (lists of) Ada tools and libraries (Was: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?)

[Jacob Sparre Andersen]

Whenever you publish a free Ada tool or library, please include a link
to the AdaIC overview of "Free Tools and Libraries" at
<http://www.adaic.org/ada-resources/tools-libraries/>.

You should of course also:

* Check if your Ada web pages are included in the AdaIC search engine.

* Ask the AdaIC editor <news@adaic.com> to include a link to your free
  tool or library in the overview.

As the Ada Information Clearinghouse - <http://www.adaic.org/> - has
funding and a paid editor, it is likely to be maintained for a long
time, and thus the best place to direct people interested in finding Ada
tools and libraries.

Kind regards,

Jacob Sparre Andersen

Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation
Vesterbrogade 148K, 1. th.
1620 K�benhavn V
Danmark

Phone:    +45 21 49 08 04
E-mail:   jacob@jacob-sparre.dk
Web-site: http://www.jacob-sparre.dk/

Re: Suggestion for publishers of (lists of) Ada tools and libraries (Was: Why are Ada libraries so poor and disorganized?)

[Randy Brukardt]

"Jacob Sparre Andersen" <jacob@jacob-sparre.dk> wrote in message 
news:878v60vryy.fsf_-_@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk...
<Directions for ensuring libraries are listed at AdaIC>

Thanks for summarizing this.

...
> * Ask the AdaIC editor <news@adaic.com> to include a link to your free
>  tool or library in the overview.

I realized this wasn't mentioned on the site anywhere (maybe that's why 
hardly anyone does it), so I added it to the contact page. Hope that will 
help in the future (because people are unlikely to remember this note when 
they need to submit something).

                              Randy.