Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpcc05!hpcuhb!hpcllla!hpclisp!defaria@hpclapd.HP.COM
From: defaria@hpclapd.HP.COM (Andy DeFaria)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Keyboard input
Message-ID: <920032@hpclapd.HP.COM>
Date: 24 Sep 90 16:18:29 GMT
References: <39@screamer.csee.usf.edu>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Calif. Language Lab
Lines: 29

>/ hpclapd:comp.lang.ada / mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) /  1:13 pm  Sep 22, 1990 /

>Indeed the solution is to call a routine from the operating system,
>preferably by writing exactly the IO routine you need in C (for instance)
>and making it Ada-callable by using pragma INTERFACE.
>
>I'm not sure what you mean by "it isn't Ada or portable." If you mean that
>it should have been included as a standard I/O package, you may be right;
>I think I'd agree. 

I think it's pretty simple: If  you  have to  resort to  using C instead of
Ada then it's not Ada is it?  What so  hard to understand  about that?  And
what happens when  you port this to a  system that  doesn't have C huh?   I
mean, what if the poor guy doesn't have anything but Ada?

>There are _lots_ of things that people could say should have been included
>in the standard; undoubtedly your list would not be exactly the same list
>as mine. That's the way it goes; the standard can't include everything in
>the whole world. So we all cope by adding additional packages. If they
>have to be written in another language and "pragma INTERFACE-d" to make
>them Ada-callable, that is not sinful.

Yeah it's not standard, it's not contained in TEXT_IO and all  that.  Also,
I've probably done more pragma INTERFACE'ing than you have.  But that don't
make it portable.    At best   it opens  up   opportunties for   portablity
problems. 

But still  how can you do this  in Ada?  (A:  You can't.) Well   what about
people who only have Ada? (A: They're stuck.)