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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,714a8558b02b32bb X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-21 10:26:43 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!zeus.visi.com!priapus.visi.com!orange.octanews.net!news.octanews.net!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: "amado.alves" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: RE: GUI was Re: why Ada is so unpopular ? Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:15:22 -0000 Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1074708945 67489 80.67.180.195 (21 Jan 2004 18:15:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:15:45 +0000 (UTC) To: Return-Path: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message Thread-Topic: GUI was Re: why Ada is so unpopular ? Thread-Index: AcPgRaeBgNI2SqBjRWKxdGKS8a5gcwAAHIh3 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Jan 2004 18:15:28.0310 (UTC) FILETIME=[8C552D60:01C3E04A] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p5 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.3 Precedence: list List-Id: Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4610 Date: 2004-01-21T18:15:22+00:00 <> Charles-for-ARG (AI-302/2) is basically a distilled version of Charles, = yes. <> I know. It's a pity the AI is split in *alternatives*. I don't see = PragmARC-for-ARG (alternative 1) and Charles-for-ARG (alternative 2) = really as alternatives. Even if they were in fact developed separately = [to my knowledge what is now alternative 2 counted with more discussion = in the ASCLWG forum (a Yahoo! group), than PragmARC-for-ARG], both = socalled alternatives have specific pluses. For example, I think = alternative 1 has better naming and iteration model, and alternative 2 = has better reference implementation. I have formulated my contributions to AI-302 in an = alternative-independent way. But by the ARG process they had to go into = one alternative. (My document on design bases went to 1, while the = persistence and indefinite elements annexes proposal went to 2. But at least in the second case I explicitly say right there that it is = alternative-independent.) Let's hope the Ada.Containers team be able to = merge the good things from both alternatives--and with the = alternative-independent persistent and indefinite elements proposals ;-) (Sorry for the illformatted text. I'm currently limited to a stupid = webmail system that I cannot configure.)