RE: A standard package for config files is needed

["Robert C. Leif" <rleif@rleif.com>]

From: Bob Leif
To: Preben
No. They both use access types, presumably because of the lower level C
code. I like CLAW because it is Ada. I would like tools that translated
XML schemas into Ada data types and Ada data types into XML schemas. An
Ada binding to XForms would be excellent. Unfortunately, neither XForms
nor XML:Fo have a solid implementation. I suspect if the XML developers
had used Ada, the software would be done and reliable. 

-----Original Message-----
From: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
[mailto:comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org] On Behalf Of Preben Randhol
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 1:36 PM
To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Subject: Re: A standard package for config files is needed

On Sat, 1 Jun 2002 10:48:03 -0700, Robert C. Leif wrote:
> This is a question of strategic marketing NOT technology. Ada could
> probably implement and improve upon most of XML; however, this is NOT
> going to happen. Because of market pressures, we have had to interface
> to Windows. A totally Ada solution would have been possible; but did
not
> happen. In fact, the easiest way to work with Windows is R&R CLAW,
> because CLAW has the great virtue of being a thick binding, which
hides
> Windows.  

Alternatively when GtkAda 2.0 comes (I mean when there are working
binaries for Windows and Linux) it would be even easier to work with
against Windows as you can do the development on Linux ;-)

As for XML and GUI, check:

http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/libglade/libglade-notes.html#LIBGLADE
-BASICS

and

http://libre.act-europe.fr/GtkAda/docs/gtkada_rm_30.html

Is this what you are looking for?

Preben