TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Wojtek Narczynski <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:58:36 +0100
Jacob Sparre Andersen <[log in to unmask]>
text/plain (65 lines)

>>2. Interface to underlying operating system, especially
>>socket programming. There is FLORIST for POSIX binding but
>>the most important part - socket connectivity - has big
>>warning that it is by no means complete / stable. You have
>>to use GNAT.Os_Lib and GNAT.Sockets that do good job for
>>that, but are not standard. Plus there are at least three
>>other libraries.

>Maybe one (or some) of us should sit down and make the
>FLORIST sockets work.  As it is right now, I manage quite
>fine with AdaSockets, but I can certainly see the point in
>using POSIX sockets instead.

Well, maybe when they finally plug internet to my home... I am currently
trying to write all Ada (not binding) FastCGI interface, but at work it
just doesn't go. This is my first project in Ada... (Yes, I am a lamer, but
a visionary one :-) I could switch from GNAT.Sockets to POSIX for testing.

Another important point. If there is a trend to reuse COTS, this is a very
strong argument to finish POSIX sockets binding. It is a must. In the end
you need to pin the stock parts together, most often by using sockets.


>> 3. Openness. I've got the impression that there are
>> millions of lines of code that could be open sourced.

>Yes.  But how much of it is interesting?  I have around 6 Mb
>of home-grown Ada code, which I can publish under an Open
>Source license.  But how many people would be interested in
>software for processing 3D particle tracks?  Or yet another
>Ada pretty-printer (which isn't very good btw)?  Or software
>for creating fractal LEGO landscapes?  (well, that one has
>actually been published)  Or a simulation of a double-slit
>experiment?  (sold that one, so there was some interest)

>I wouldn't mind making all my own Ada code available under
>an Open Source license, but I am not sure the benefit is
>large enough to make the time I would have to spend on it

I can't answer this question for you. Nobody can. Just put it on sf &
freshmeat. Or not. Your risk of loosing some time. Better loose it this way
then on mourning Ada already.


>I can certainly agree on that. But what can we do about it?
>(I will not be working at a university for the next two
>years, and I am a physicist, not a computer scientist or
>software engineer)

Don't take it too personal, there are 291 people on this list :-) I am
positive that there are institutions that would be delighted to put a few
$M into "Adacemic Association for Ada Awarenes". Not to mention it would
make very much sense. "We need money to teach students how to create
software that doesn't crash, cause bankrupcy, and kill people." That would
sell. Or me wrong?