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: 103376,7604bcd46b47b367 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-08 20:45:24 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!rcn!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Eric G. Miller" Subject: Re: OO & Standard Libraries Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Message-ID: References: <3cd93d95$1@pull.gecm.com> User-Agent: Pan/0.11.2 (Unix) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Comment-To: "Marin David Condic" Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 03:45:24 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.119.26.33 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 1020915924 216.119.26.33 (Wed, 08 May 2002 20:45:24 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 20:45:24 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23753 Date: 2002-05-09T03:45:24+00:00 List-Id: In , Marin David Condic wrote: > I particularly liked: > > "Bundling of libraries with IDE, compiler or VM creates defacto standards > and control points for language/platform vendors." > > I think the article has some interesting things to say on the subject and > ought to be a good read for those of us interested in getting a "standard" > component library into Ada. I wish he'd back up statements like the following: """ While there are many outstanding open source contributions there is naturally a much larger number of poor quality implementations. The Open Source GUI libraries such as Motif and GTK are both problematic and are in large part responsible for the lack of Linux use on the desktop. """ The author doesn't provide any basis for any of the assertions in this paragraph. Does the word "monopoly" mean anything? Besides, Motif is only recently "open source"; way too late for consideration by "open source" folks switching to it from KDE/QT or GNOME/GTK. The author is apparently arguing for a consortium type organization with license agreements, etc... This is exactly what kept Linux folks from using Motif (and why GTK was created). Funny, he seems to be in the business of being a middleware middleman... Anyway, I don't much care for journal articles that make lots of unsubstantiated arguments and assertions; the author fails to provide even one reference to back up any of his arguments. As such, it's just some guy's opinion. Granted, it's a guest column and not a "research ariticle" -- kind of stretching the idea of a "journal" publication by having guest columns... just call it a magazine!