Re: questions on Ada openGL binding in the GLOBE3D packages

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

Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> писал(а) в своём письме Thu,  
02 Aug 2012 15:56:03 +0400:

> On 02.08.12 13:12, Egil Høvik wrote:
>>> Why not keep things standard? The standard is there.
> It there a strong technical argument in favor of
> using package software in stead of names implying
> packages? Better visibility control? Better compilation
> performance due to separation? Better change management
> by modularization?

Do we need use name prefixes while having high level tools
to organize imported procedures in a way we decide by self?

Prefix is a C "necessity", and when imported it then has nothing common  
with C.

It seems, that a good binding can provide many benefits when imports being
organized in an ada-way, only if you are not going to provide
low-level direct 1:1 mapping to what people use in C.
Is there a benefit using 1:1 C in Ada?

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