egui VS ada-spark-rfcs

Anyone who's interested in the AccessKit integration can play with my work-in-progress branch: https://github.com/mwcampbell/egui/tree/accesskit

It's currently Windows-only, and I'm working on the big missing feature, which is text editing support.

> A core premise of Cocoa, and MVC in general, is that UIs are a projection of data into a different form of data, specifically bits on a screen.

This is a tangent, but the implicit assumption that the UI is visual is just begging for a response from an accessibility perspective, so here goes.

Accessibility is very much an afterthought in native GUIs, not only in Cocoa, but also in Windows with the UI Automation API, and AFAIK with other native accessibility APIs as well. With these APIs, the assistive technology (e.g. screen reader) pulls information from the application (usually via the GUI toolkit), through repeated calls to methods defined by the accessibility API. Often the AT has to do several such calls in a row (and those often translate to multiple IPC round trips, making things slow). And the UI might change between such calls; there's no guaranteed way to get a consistent snapshot of the whole thing, as there is with a visual frame. On the application/toolkit side, these methods may return different responses from one call to the next, and the application or toolkit has to fire the right events when things change.

The web improves on this, in that accessibility information is conveyed through HTML tags and attributes. And yes, this is included in the output of a React component's render function. So while in practice, implementing accessibility may still be an afterthought, it's not an architectural afterthought as it is in native platforms.

One of my goals in AccessKit [1] is to work around this shortcoming of native accessibility APIs, particularly for developers of cross-platform non-web GUI toolkits. In AccessKit, the toolkit pushes a full or incremental accessibility tree update to the AccessKit platform adapter, which maintains the full tree in memory and uses that to implement the platform accessibility API. This even works for immediate-mode GUIs, as one can see in my proof-of-concept integration with the Rust egui toolkit [2].

[1]: https://github.com/AccessKit/accesskit

[2]: https://github.com/mwcampbell/egui/tree/accesskit

I can also report some modest progress on my own work on accessibility of immediate-mode GUIs. I have a branch of the Rust egui library [1] that has basic accessibility on Windows using my AccessKit project [2]. I do have a long way to go to make this fully usable and ready to submit upstream, especially when taking non-Windows platforms into account.

[1]: https://github.com/mwcampbell/egui/tree/accesskit

[2]: https://github.com/AccessKit/accesskit

Original discussion was there, I guess you can post your comments to that PR to keep the discussion in one place.

I forgot where I saw it, but I do recall reading somewhere that the ARG had discussed whether a shorter revision cycle would be better or not. I wouldn't be surprised if the creation of this ( https://github.com/AdaCore/ada-spark-rfcs ) was inspired by that discussion.

Ada might be getting pattern matching soon too:

https://github.com/AdaCore/ada-spark-rfcs/blob/master/protot...

> I did some ADA in the past and yes, it is a nice language, but it lacks the modernity and a dynamic community like Rust. ADA did received some nice update to its specification, but, just like C++, it struggle / cannot really fit the latest innovation in programming language that easily.

I'm still learning both Ada and Rust, nevertheless I humbly disagree. The more I learn it and other "old" languages the more it looks to me like "modern" ones rediscover things that have been present in other languages for years.

The really significant difference I can see for now is that Ada is not focused so strongly on functional programming paradigm. Rust borrow checker is a strong success of course and was another significant difference, but latest SPARK got borrow checking capabilities too, AFAIK.

While Ada's open-source community is smaller, I find it as energetic and devoted to improving the ecosystem as Rust's. I have no idea about closed-source community, but in the past 4 years ArianeGroup [1], Airbus [2] and Nvidia [3] talked about choosing Ada for their high-integrity applications.

> And to be fair, it is fine. ADA is very much a "committee" language (its spec are ISO/IEC) instead of a "community" language (all the spec and rfc of Rust are on github and anyone can easily discuss them).

You can discuss Ada/SPARK RFCs here: https://github.com/AdaCore/ada-spark-rfcs . I think I once saw on Ada forum or chat that someone proposing changes to the language was simply invited to talk to people working on the standard, so it doesn't look like the language is developed in isolation or something.

> This makes it so that ADA doesn't get the attention, and the rapidity of innovation, that a language like Rust does, but ADA is mostly made for program that will need to be maintained in critical operations for decades with the code being maintainable and compilable far into the future.

I think that Ada adopted quiet quickly to standards set by Rust: lower entry barrier toolchain, compelling licensing, library distribution, RFCs, etc. And in terms of language features, in many areas it's not only on par, but ahead of competition. So you're less likely to see lots of changes, but they do happen nevertheless. I'm not saying Ada is perfect, of course. There are parts of it that other languages do better. No shame in that.

IMHO, the reason Ada is unknown to many people is a combination of its past, myths surrounding it, and general trend of people to follow trends. ;) But I currently find Ada/SPARK even more compelling option than Rust, even though I like both.

[1] https://www.facebook.com/ArianeGroup/posts/2872955946126067

There's a proposal to allow dot syntax for untagged types as well.

There's also an active discussion about adding format strings to the language here: https://github.com/AdaCore/ada-spark-rfcs/pull/77