Hi everybody. On Friday 05 December 2003 08:54, Daniel Robbins wrote: > Everyone, please note above that I said "have a design competition *once > we have the requirements finalized*." This hasn't happened yet. Please Yes, and I apologise about that. However as there seem to be a bit of confusion I want to emphasize again that this is really not a design contest entry - I would be too ashaimed to propose these few ideas I listed in the design *of the illustratory prototype* as a portage-ng design :).
The purpose of this entry was to illustrate the capabilities of Ada language. The intention is to bring up some information with the code that illustrates what can be expected when you use it for people to look at and form the opinion. I am not trying to push towards Ada-only, as it was taken on one or two occasions :). However knowing the state of affairs with the languages and having programmed in a few of these I felt it would be helpfull to have an illustration up on the better practices I encountered. Probably because of too much time spent on writing my paper (the unrelated biophys one) I chose a bit too catchy title, for which I apologise again. Since a few good points were brought up, that might be relevant to requirements as well, I feel obliged to answer some of the posters (in particular pvdabeel's) and dissolve some misconceptions (spider's are a good example :)). However starting a language flame war is definitely not anything I would like to do. As such, I would prefer to keep the design discussions to gentoo-portage-dev list. I will also answer any ada-related questions you may have off list, except may be for one or two postings on -dev, to which I'll reply to the list. George -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
