--- "Kester, Rush W." <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Richard, > I know this is an old thread, but "The times they > are a changing." IMHO, > for the better. Yes they are, there have been some very significant (not just in what they do, but that they are open source also!) advances in the last year for Ada. GNATCOM (Ada COM tools, see CLA announcement), JGNAT, GtkAda, Rapid 2.0, and Cafe 1815 (http://www.acenet.com.au/~gbull/) to name a few that open the doors wide for new forms of rapid GUI development with Ada. > GtkAda now provides the GUI widgets you are seeking > and the available widget > set is growing rapidly. What's important is that > unlike VB, they are > portable to non-Microsoft platforms. That is not neccesarily a selling point and in fact as you pointed out, the big benefit of VB is that it is Win32 specific and takes advantage of Win32's GUI such as common controls (tools bars, spinners, calendards, trees, etc.), common dialogs (open/save, print, etc.), drag & drop, Web browser, databases, etc. (BTW, I have been working on an open source Win32 framework coupled with my COM/ActiveX work that I hope to release as a prototype in the next month or two that offers Ada the same rapid development advantages on Win32 including database access via controls hooked in to ADO) Cross platform always means giving up something and that is often not an option for professional applications. > It works with > Win32 and any platform > that support Windows X11. There are some glitches on the Win32 side and applications written with it seriously lack the feel of a real Win 32 application. It is not realy a solution on Win32 today. > I agree > that four of your five > domains: GUI development, data manipulation, > OS-based device control, and communications in > general (and web in > particular) have great potential. They are the "Key" to getting Ada on the desktop of the future. > I also agree that > because of its > widespread use, the MS Windows OS cannot be ignored, > but the world of > students and the software industry should be broader > than Microsoft. It should be, but for desktop PCs, it isn't. But slowly things are changing, and perhaps some day every one will have FreeBSD on their desktops :-) > > Why not devote our considerable talents and energy > to making Ada's component > set into something well engineered to meet future > software needs. Bravo, I must say it is very disheartening to see Richard Conn endorsing VB and praising its virtues on Team-"Ada". Particulary when the gap is not as large between VB and Ada as it once was for rapid development and there are certainly commercial tools priced less then VB (like CLAW and its builder) that accomplish much of what he is looking for. I also find it interesting that Richar Conn chose to push an MS tool that is thousands of light years BEHIND Delphi or C++ builder. It may be interesting to note the MS has dumped money in to the ASE project making VB readily available, perhaps RR software should send him a demo copy of their product. I hope to be giving a tutorial at SigAda 2000 on new developments in rapid GUI development on Win32 in addition to one on COM with Ada. If it works out, I plan on demonstrating ways of doing GUI programming with Ada on Win32 that takes little work and produces results as good as, or superior to VB. Since you quoted the original, I am compelled to write.... > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richard L. Conn > > Component-based Software Engineering. That's > where I > > see VB fitting in like a glove, and that's were I > see > > Ada lacking. GNATCOM for Ada does it better, much better. > The VB GUI is not just buttons and > text > > boxes (THAT was the first day). It is also > dynamic > > list boxes (a form of linked list without the > pointers), > > drive list boxes and directory list boxes and file > list > > boxes which combine to allow you to navigate a > file > > system without programming any system calls, the > chart > > control which allows you to configure and draw 16 > kinds > > of charts (bar, XY, line, area, pie, both 2D and > 3D, etc) > > without worrying about manipulating pixels, the > common > > dialog control which allows for 6 common program > needs > > (open a file, save/create a file, select a > printer, > > select a font, select a color, and invoke online > help) > > with almost no effort, and so on. All available to Ada and with a finer grain of control. There are frameworks that take advantage of these features on Ada already. VB's builder (lacking in comparison to Delphi) does make it easier to get up and running, but for large projects it falls short quickly. There are builders for Ada now, and bigger and better are just over the horizon. > The standard > packages > > in Ada95 are very good, but no where near this > level of > > abstraction. Assuming the components are reliable > > (which they seem to be), you can put together > massive > > applications with very few lines of code. Having written "professional" code on Win32 (including code in VB :-(, VB is not a serious option for "massive" or even medium size applications. It works well for IT shops in corporate to get small things done and for more or less "scripting" type of activities. > They > work the > > first time (in my experience) and you are done and > ready > > to move on. The Web Browser I wrote in 1 hour on > a > > Sunday morning was part of what made me trigger my > first > > message. Easily done using GNATCOM and with a far greater degree of control. > > > > The domain engineering which went into VB really > shows. > > We see the five target domains clearly: Windows OS > > interfacing, GUI development, data manipulation, > > OS-based device control, and communications in > general > > (and web in particular). The VB controls operate > at such a high > > level of abstraction that you don't have to worry > about > > the low-level details and can concentrate on the > problem. Once you have worked on some one else VB code or try to push the edges of VB even a little, you will think differently. If you try to do anything professional in VB you will quickly find that you can crash (and I mean crash hard) VB programs with ease if for no other reason then "you don't have to worry about the low-level details". Of course if you try to do anything fancy with VB, you will have to figure out those details that are being hidden from you. I recommend reading Hard Core Visual Basic to get a start in the direction of how to make VB lean towards something professional. > > Ada was a significant step in the right direction, > but > > VB is a much bigger step. Delphi is bigger, yet they both have language limitations that make Ada a clear choice for larger systems. > Ada could be there as > well > > (there's no technical reason why these highly > abstract > > component features cannot be added), but the cost > of > > such an effort would be really significant. Not realy, much is already there and much more is on the way. Of course help is always appreciated, hint, hint. David Botton __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites. http://invites.yahoo.com