Come on guys! I hate to see in-fighting among the Ada
community. Save that for the unwashed programming
masses. We're starting to deteriorate to the "name calling"
I think everybody pretty much agrees that we will qualify the
term "standard" with the appropriate adjective when we use it,
as Mike and others have suggested.
I think everyone agrees we need to keep the engineering
discipline in Ada.
I think everyone pretty much wants to see Ada running on
as many platforms as possible (including Windows), keeping
the tools as uniform as possible (notice I didn't say as standard
as possible, for fear of creating another thread fractle ;-).
And after all, Windows is a valid platform for development,
but I for one refuse to do anything with the MFC or the
Registry because I want my application to be as platform
independent as possible. Currently I'm using a POSIX
spec with Windows API calls in the body to do my system
specific stuff. (And yes I know if I wrap the MFC calls within
my own class then I only have to re-write the body if I need
to switch platforms. And yes I also know there is a vendor
out there that ported the MFC to Linux, and will probably do
so for other platforms).
I don't think Rick is trying to perpetuate Microsoft propaganda,
because he does have a valid point that we can't ignore it
and it would be a good arena for increasing Ada awareness.
I assumed that was his point and don't want to read anymore
I think pretty much all of us are grateful to David Botton,
Jim Walker, and others for contributing so much to the
Ada effort. Sorry for those I left out, I'm just too tired to
try and remember all the names at this point.
The problem with E-Mail sometimes is that it's easy for
misunderstandings to arise just from simple omissions.
I have a bad habit writing things within a certain context
making assumptions that others will take those conditions
for granted, only to have it erupt into a flurry of dialog. I think
everyone here agrees more than disagrees but we're
I know I've been frustrated lately with having to qualify
everything I'm saying, and I've been about as guilty with
lashing back in like manor. Because why should I have
to reason out someone else's statement when they're
requiring me to be crystal clear.
Let's be a little more forgiving and try to assume the best
instead of the worst (innocent until proven guilty). Let's
get back to collaborating instead of clobbering (I'm tired,
it's the best I could come up with).
Kiss and make up guys, because "I love you man!" ;-)