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,f297d5b850ee1e61
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-03-05 09:47:02 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!skates!not-for-mail
From: Stephen Leake <Stephen.A.Leake@nasa.gov>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada2005 clear screen etc.
Date: 05 Mar 2003 12:44:47 -0500
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (skates.gsfc.nasa.gov)
Message-ID: <uu1ehpv1s.fsf@nasa.gov>
References: <87f5a614.0303011527.4cb09de2@posting.google.com>
 <u1y1ogq71.fsf@nasa.gov> <z049a.24401$8f7.9485@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
 <usmu3m3fm.fsf@nasa.gov> <b44dcu$16t$1@news.uni-stuttgart.de>
 <mailman.0.1046882783.4331.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: anarres.gsfc.nasa.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: skates.gsfc.nasa.gov 1046887128 26939 128.183.235.92 (5 Mar 2003
 17:58:48 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.gsfc.nasa.gov
NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 Mar 2003 17:58:48 GMT
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:34925
Date: 2003-03-05T17:58:48+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

sk <noname@myob.com> writes:

> Let the market decide on useful *external* libraries, but do not
> burden the language itself with items possibly subject to fashion
> or politics.

I agree. 

However, the ANSI standard for terminals has been around for a long
time, and still has some use. Why not put it in the Ada standard?

I have never used many of the appendices in Ada; that doesn't mean
they should not be there.

A compiler vendor might chime in that no customer of theirs has ever
requested this feature; that would be more meaningful than individual
posters on comp.lang.ada saying "i've never needed this". Several
compiler vendors saying that would be even more meaningful. Hmm. I
guess that's the "market" you talk about above; so I guess I agree
with you again :)

> Eg, Sockets : Windows has an API for sockets, the rest of the world
> has another. I would not like for Ada, a few years from now, tied to
> the obsolete socket API when the politics gets sorted out and one
> API is accepted by all. Also especially since the abstract concept
> of "sockets" might have changed altogther and be called "connection"
> or "channel" or something.

You do have to pick a standard sometime; there will always be a
"better" way "just around the corner". The trick is to pick the right
time.

For sockets, it seems that GNAT.Sockets (also AdaSockets? I have not
actually used either) works well on both Unix and Windows, so that
seems a reasonable candidate for an Ada standard.

-- 
-- Stephe