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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,632dbd0caea19836
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.germany.com!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon.j.wright@mac.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: System calls - GNAT library vs. direct bindings
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 20:50:41 +0100
Organization: Pushface
Message-ID: <m26467lai6.fsf@mac.com>
References: <1180623520.303981.191090@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
 <m2ira8lpt5.fsf@mac.com>
 <465f3924$0$6411$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1180727442 864 62.49.19.209 (1 Jun 2007 19:50:42
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 19:50:42 +0000 (UTC)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7rCJCn3c7LwoVchNFVBrgmNiSIA=
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.95 (darwin)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16036
Date: 2007-06-01T20:50:41+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

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?