Re: questions on Ada openGL binding in the GLOBE3D packages

["Vasiliy Molostov" <molostoff@gmail.com>]

Egil Høvik <egilhovik@hotmail.com> писал(а) в своём письме Thu, 02 Aug  
2012 15:12:51 +0400:

>> Why not keep things standard? The standard is there.
>
> You seem to be confused. What you call "the standard" is
> just the C binding. The standard explicitly states that
> example syntax is in C, and that other languages with better
> namespace handling and subprogram overloading can do things
> differently.
> Writing GL.Vertex is more readable than GL.glVertex2d.
> Let the compiler figure out the types of your parameters,
> and how many, you specify. It will complain if it can't find
> a match.
>
> Some people complain about Ada being too verbose; In this case,
> I would say C is more verbose, why should that be a bad thing
> for Ada?

It seems that you probably right - there is a good reason to keep things
convenient to Ada related environment. Perhaps, interface of some sort of  
C that lie on C naming
is indeed a mangled names used to import, and is not going to be human  
convenient.

BTW, initially GL library from MS had no gl prefix.

Do we need operate mangled names in a high level language?

Which standard we should apply here?


-- 
Написано в почтовом клиенте браузера Opera: http://www.opera.com/mail/