Re: System calls - GNAT library vs. direct bindings

[Simon Wright <simon.j.wright@mac.com>]

Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus.rm.tsoh@maps.futureapps.de> writes:

> Simon Wright wrote:
>
>> given that GNAT already has a
>> library. It would have been yet another library to justify to the
>> technical authority.
>
> Are standards and portability still an issue in Ada projects?

I think my masters are more interested in portability than in
standards. I know that adherence to standards should bring increased
portability; what to do about an RFP that requests 7-layer OSI
conformance?  AFAICR we decided that they weren't serious and offered
run-of-the-mill TCP/IP (BSD-style).

I don't see how AdaSockets is better than GNAT.Sockets in the sense of
conforming to standards? The web site talks about BSD sockets ...

> Aonix seems to offer a standards conforming POSIX binding.
> Can't say how much networking it offers.

Can't see what benefits this offers to anyone programming in Ada
(unless you need to tick off items in a compliance matrix). Convince
me, someone?