From ns@slab.sfc.keio.ac.jp Sat Mar  6 10:07:43 1993
Received: from mail0.sfc.keio.ac.jp by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA13258
  (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for <sc22wg15@dkuug.dk>); Sat, 6 Mar 1993 10:07:43 +0100
Received: from klein.slab.sfc.keio.ac.jp by mail0.sfc.keio.ac.jp (5.61/2.7W)
	id AA24005; Sat, 6 Mar 93 18:07:55 +0900
Received: from meteor.slab.sfc.keio.ac.jp by klein.slab.sfc.keio.ac.jp (5.51/6.4J.6-slab1.0)
	id AA08095; Sat, 6 Mar 93 17:08:26+0900
Received: from localhost by meteor.slab.sfc.keio.ac.jp (4.1/6.4J.6-slab-slave1.0)
	id AA03672; Sat, 6 Mar 93 18:07:44 JST
Return-Path: <ns@slab.sfc.keio.ac.jp>
Message-Id: <9303060907.AA03672@meteor.slab.sfc.keio.ac.jp>
To: posix@ccut.cc.u-tokyo.ac.jp, lorrain@mtuxo.att.com
Cc: SC22WG15@dkuug.dk, isaak@decvax.dec.com, rabin@osf.org
Subject: Re: (posix 1106) (SC22WG15.182) Cross Language Questionnaire 
In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 08 Jan 93 13:04:00 -0500.
             <199301081807.AA22997@dkuug.dk> 
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 93 18:07:43 +0900
From: ns@slab.sfc.keio.ac.jp
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

Dear Lorraine:

 We are sorry to be late to submit the draft of the cross language
questionare reply. The folowing is our reply:

----------------------------------------------------------------

> 	Could you please send me your opinion with respect to the
> following questions:
> 
>     4)   Does the value of this cross-language standard depend on
>          its widespread support by programming language standards?
>     

If a cross-language standard is applicable only to a few
languages, it would be useless to spend much time and effort
to specify such standard.  In such a case, single language
standard is preferrable.  Before starting cross-language
standardization work, it should be carefully examined 
how many language standards are applicable to that standard.

> 
>     5)   Does the value of this cross-language standard depend on a
>          common binding method being used for all programming
>          language bindings?
>     

Please clarify what a common binding method could be  used for all
programming language bindings.

> 	For each of the programming languages listed above, could you
> answer the following questions:
> 
>     8)   Is a binding useful between the cross-language standard and
>          the programming language standard?  Why?
>     
>            Pascal
Yes
>            Extended Pascal
Yes
>            APL
No
>            COBOL
No
>            Fortran
No
>            BASIC
Yes
>            Ada
Yes
>            Modula-2
Yes
>            C
Yes
>            LISP
No
>            Prolog
No
>            FIMS
No
>            VDM
No
>            C++
Yes

Note:
One of our concern is that cross language standard dependent extension to
language standard may decrease the portability of applications.

> 
>     9)   Is a binding feasible between the cross-language standard
>          and the programming language standard?  If not, why not?
> 
>            Pascal
Yes
>            Extended Pascal
Yes
>            APL
No
>            COBOL
No
>            Fortran
No
>            BASIC
No
>            Ada
Yes
>            Modula-2
Yes
>            C
Yes
>            LISP
No
>            Prolog
No
>            FIMS
No
>            VDM
No
>            C++
Yes
> 
Note:
For some application domain specific POSIX standards like threads 
and realtime, binding to some of the above languages has substantial 
difficulties and defining such binding may be meaningless.

-------------------------------------------------------------

                          Sincerely


                          Nobuo Saito
                         Japanese Delegate for SC22/WG15