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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2d2df3e9ad18fa63,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-19 12:40:25 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed1.uni2.dk!news.get2net.dk.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Sender: malo@niflheim.malonet Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: ISO/IEC 14519 - Ada POSIX binding From: Mark Lorenzen Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: 19 Jun 2003 23:43:56 +0200 NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.84.221.216 X-Complaints-To: abuse@colt-telecom.dk X-Trace: news.get2net.dk 1056051622 62.84.221.216 (Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:40:22 CEST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:40:22 CEST Organization: Colt Telecom Kunde Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:39456 Date: 2003-06-19T23:43:56+02:00 List-Id: There has lately been some discussions on c.l.a about defining a socket package for use with Ada 200Y - either as a part of the standard or as a de-facto standard socket package. So my big question is therefore: What's wrong with ISO/IEC 14519? It is of course pretty big, but that is a natural consequence of POSIX being big. I think it would be better to require that vendors support the ISO/IEC 14519 instead of trying to define all sorts of packages that do not have the inter-operability and common data types that the ISO/IEC 14519 packages have. What is your opinion? - Mark