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,ac39a12d5faf5b14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-18 12:34:58 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!skates!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Development process in the Ada community Date: 18 Apr 2002 15:22:10 -0400 Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (skates.gsfc.nasa.gov) Message-ID: References: <4519e058.0204150645.62003096@posting.google.com> <4519e058.0204170855.16950071@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: anarres.gsfc.nasa.gov Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: skates.gsfc.nasa.gov 1019158105 19662 128.183.220.71 (18 Apr 2002 19:28:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.gsfc.nasa.gov NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Apr 2002 19:28:25 GMT User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22746 Date: 2002-04-18T19:28:25+00:00 List-Id: "Marin David Condic" writes: > Probably, you really need to have Win32Ada (or similar) no matter what. I don't think so. Certainly Windex is _not_ built on top of Win32Ada; I started to, but it was just too weird and C-like. I just imported the Win32 functions as needed, using Ada types for parameters directly when possible. > This thin binding is needed just to keep up with whatever Microsoft > comes out with next as the OS API, so that if it didn't get included > in the more abstract API, the programmer still has access to it. (It > was originally auto-generated, right? So if a new C interface comes > out, it can easily be re-auto-generated? Sounds important to me...) I don't think it is being updated; are there Win2000 and XP versions? > But could CLAW be made to incorporate (in an abstract sense - not > necessarily with an identical realization) whatever capabilities the > others offer and provide a common platform for development? With enough money for programmer time, it could. Except the main thing Windex offers over CLAW is the GMGPL license. Hmm. GWindows makes a start towards a "subscriber" model of event handling (but only a start). That is significantly different from Windex and CLAW, which use an "override" model. I don't think one windowing system can have both. Hmm; maybe it could; call the subscribers, then dispatch. GtkAda uses a "subscriber" model. Since it is not based on a langauge that supports dispatching and overriding, it probably can't do both. Although I could provide a subscribed handler that then dispatched. All kinds of weirdness is possible :). > Probably, the hard part would be to define some sort of "portable" > subset so it could work on Linux/Unix as well & cover features done > by GtkAda. I see no reason not to just use GtkAda. It needs some work, and it needs some tutorials (as you have pointed out before) but it easily does everything I need it to do, in many cases better than Windex does (which is why I'm switching to it). ACT is supporting it. The only thing I don't like about GtkAda at the moment is that it is possible to compile an incorrect program; you get run-time errors like "this handler has the wrong profile for this signal". Errors like that are caught at compile time in Windex. This is partly because of the subscriber model, but also because Gtk uses strings (rather than enumerals or tagged types) to identify signals. I think this can be fixed with an ASIS tool. -- -- Stephe