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,LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,92c39a3be0a7f17d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-17 07:28:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.flash.net!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr11.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Pat Rogers" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <9v57u1$mfb$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9v74ov014bc@drn.newsguy.com> <9vb24v$7fg$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9vdp9f$9vo$1@nh.pace.co.uk> Subject: Re: Future with Ada X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.191.176.121 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr11.news.prodigy.com 1008602856 ST000 208.191.176.121 (Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:27:36 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:27:36 EST Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: TSUGWWCEJKVOBTT^]BCB^]\@PJ_^PBQLGPQRZQ]KEYUNDQUCCNSUAACY@L[ZX__HGFD]JBJNSFXTOOGA_VWY^_HG@FW_HUTHOH]TBPGCO\P^PLP^@[GLHUK@WLECKFVL^TYG[@RMWQXIWM[SDDYWNLG_G[_BWUCHFY_Y@AS@Q[B\APPF@DCZM_PG_VSCPQZM Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:27:36 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18007 Date: 2001-12-17T15:27:36+00:00 List-Id: "Mark Lundquist" wrote in message news:fQhT7.14016$Kg2.1376304@rwcrnsc51... > > "Pat Rogers" wrote in message > news:YxvS7.2239$_h.1737012240@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com... > > "Marin David Condic" wrote in > > message news:9vdp9f$9vo$1@nh.pace.co.uk... > > > > > > I understand your point, but look at how much resistance there was to > most > > > of the existing container libraries? What is already out there seemed to > > > have flaws that sufficient numbers of people found strongly > objectionable. > > > > My impression was that most of those doing the objecting were those with > > "competing" libraries. That might be wrong, but it looked that way from > > a slight distance (by which I mean I didn't read absolutely all the > > relevant posts). Sure, those of us who've spent time developing code > > and thinking about the subject therefore have opinions that are both > > more passionate and qualified, but it doesn't seem to me to be a lot of > > people overall. > > Do you wish there were *more* people with strong opinions about these > things? :-) Maybe I'm getting you wrong, but it seems as though you are > saying that the people who actually care about how this stuff works are an > obstruction to the process... :-) My point is not that "too many cooks spoil the soup", although I believe that apllies here too, but rather that the cooks will argue amongst themselves endlessly (about what to name their dishes for example) while the customers "starve". (Excuse the hyperbole.:) > > > If it didn't get adopted by unilateral imposition, its tough to get a > > > consensus. (I'd bet that if GNAT came bundled with the BC's, people > would > > > still object - but would likely use it anyway.) > > > > Exactly my point -- we cannot please everybody, completely, under any > > circumstances. > > With all respect, I feel this is a cop-out. I firmly believe that an Ada > foundation library with collections (and more), with which everybody *will* > be genuinely pleased, *can* be written. It just has not been -- yet. I'm speaking from personal experience -- YMMV -- when I submit that a universally accepted library that pleases everyone will not happen. (Of course I don't mean that I will not like it, therefore it will not be "universal". :) > > So let's pick one and as a group start asking the > > vendors to provide them. We have reason to believe the vendors will > > respond. > > I have a hard time believing that some kind of petition from a handful of > comp.lang.ada readers is going to induce the Ada vendors to bundle some > library. That does not constitute a business "demand". Then we're in trouble no matter how the library comes about (new design v. existing) if we cannot get the vendors to take it on board. However, a "petition from a handfull of c.l.a. readers" is not what I had in mind. I was thinking that c.l.a. and team-ada would be used to get the word out (to ask the vendors for it). I know some of the vendors well; it would not take a number in the thousands. > How many compiler licenses do you suppose are on the table over this? :-) :-) None, of course, but that's not what is at risk, is it? > I must say that I'm quite opposed to the "pick one and go with it idea", and > I really wish that you would reconsider recommending it. I think we can do > better than that, and that's what some of us here are trying to do. Then I hope I am wrong.