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-Thread: 103376,c406e0c4a6eb74ed X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!elnk-atl-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!d9c68f36!not-for-mail Message-ID: <4121FFF1.80404@noplace.com> From: Marin David Condic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (OEM-HPQ-PRS1C03) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: ADA Popularity Discussion Request References: <49dc98cf.0408110556.18ae7df@posting.google.com> <4121E4B4.5080609@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 12:54:14 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.22.172 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net 1092747254 209.165.22.172 (Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:54:14 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 05:54:14 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2776 Date: 2004-08-17T12:54:14+00:00 List-Id: Again, more good news. Vector and matrix math included as a standard annex of some form would add functionality & help encourage people to make use of Ada. Personally, I think there is enough grist for the mill in the area of mathematics that there could be a lot more than just vector and matrix functionality added. As the item you cite observes, the packages can be implemented in "pure" Ada and hence should pose no problems to adoption. I'd disagree where it says: "Providing secondary standards has not proved satisfactory because they are not sufficiently visible to the user community as a whole." Maybe historically, and to a point. The question is "Would people use a secondary standard if it was blessed by Ada and included with most/all compilers?" Perhaps people have avoided "secondary standards" because they aren not viewed as "sufficiently standard"? They ask "Can I count on this to be portable to some other implementation?" If it comes with most/all implementations, then the answer is "Yes". If its just someone's blob of code out there somewhere with no "official" standing and it is their problem to insure it works on their platform/compiler then they may avoid it out of fear that it will cost too much or take too long to deal with it themselves & opt for their own implementation because they at least understand and control it. One might also ask if the "secondary standards" are "good" standards? I've seen lots of standards that were so overly complex that people have difficulty understanding how they work and what to do with them. It is critical that they be sufficiently clear, easy to use and well documented or the burden of trying to utilize them is less than that needed to roll your own. MDC Georg Bauhaus wrote: > > The next standard may provide some more: > http://www.ada-auth.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/AIs/AI-00296.TXT?rev=1.17 > > > -- Georg -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "All reformers, however strict their social conscience, live in houses just as big as they can pay for." --Logan Pearsall Smith ======================================================================