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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c9629eba26884d78 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-30 10:54:30 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!wn14feed!wn13feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: tmoran@acm.org Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: XML DOM Binding for Ada 95 - matter of style References: X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.234.13.56 X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-Trace: rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net 1059587668 12.234.13.56 (Wed, 30 Jul 2003 17:54:28 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 17:54:28 GMT Organization: Comcast Online Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 17:54:28 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:41035 Date: 2003-07-30T17:54:28+00:00 List-Id: >just to stick close to these IDL-Specs. The result doesn't have an Ada-like >feeling - the procedures names are written in one word, the exception >... >binding feel very Adaesque. Ada users would learn it easier, it would better >fit in the program, The first is called a "thin" binding, the latter a "thick" binding. For some comments on the tradeoffs, see the Introduction and section 2.1 in our TriAda paper "CLAW, a High Level, Portable, Ada 95 Binding for Microsoft Windows", available on-line at www.rrsoftware.com Also see IEEE Std 1003.5-1992 "POSIX Ada language Interfaces", search c.l.a. for "thick" or "thin", or search www.adaic.org/site/wide-search.html