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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f1a4cf648f2724ee X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-25 13:10:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!freenix!enst!enst.fr!not-for-mail From: "Robert C. Leif" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: RE: ARG asks Ada Community for API Proposals. Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 13:09:48 -0700 Organization: ENST, France Sender: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org Message-ID: Reply-To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: marvin.enst.fr Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: avanie.enst.fr 1022357403 5283 137.194.161.2 (25 May 2002 20:10:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@enst.fr NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 20:10:03 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: X-Envelope-From: rleif@rleif.com X-Envelope-To: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.8 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: comp.lang.ada mail<->news gateway List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24790 Date: 2002-05-25T13:09:48-07:00 From: Bob Leif To: Dale Stanbrough et al. The libraries should be kept separate from the standard. The period between revisions to the Ada standard is way too long for bindings to other software, such as XML. Many libraries should be first created by some sort of consensus system and tried out as provisional standards. Then, they can be promoted to being an annex or a part thereof. Many of the annexes should be decoupled from synchrony with the standard. Besides permitting the necessary adaptability at the periphery of the Ada standard, it will permit a continuous rather than a batch approach to the maintenance of the language. In short, we should follow the old software principle of divide and conquer. As for the API, it should be based on XML. If we can not have one programming language, we should limit the number to two. Ada and XML are similar and complement each other. -----Original Message----- From: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org [mailto:comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org] On Behalf Of Dale Stanbrough Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 2:48 PM To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org Subject: Re: ARG asks Ada Community for API Proposals. In article , "Randy Brukardt" wrote: > Speaking for myself (not necessarily the ARG), I don't think you should > read too much into those criteria. They certainly were not intended to > be an exclusive list. To my mind, the important point is that the > libraries have a community consensus (where "community" is intentionally > vague), and are not just something written by someone in their basement. > If Grace has a consensus, then it will necessarily meet the usage > criteria, if not immedately, certainly by the time the standard gets > done. > > As far as point 2 goes, it seems to me that the ease-of-use criteria got > omitted. I don't think anyone wants complex solutions where simple ones > will do. Going overboard on functionality can be a mistake, because if > the package is too large, people will have trouble using it. What are the likely new features of Ada though? If we have can have some form of implicit instantiation of generics, or if Ada provides fully fledged constructors (not just functions) or if Ada deprecates the use of some features, then all of these could well affect the design of any class libraries. Perhaps Ada needs to have a library standardisation process which is 180 degrees out of phase with the language standardisation, so that we can incorporate features placed into the language. Dale