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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5bcc293dc5642650
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.46.193 with SMTP id x1mr16246747pbm.7.1319223444426;
        Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:57:24 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 d5ni40525pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Vadim Godunko <vgodunko@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why no Ada.Wide_Directories?
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:55:41 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <1b680566-b015-407c-af5b-6715898ff0cb@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>
References: <9937871.172.1318575525468.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prib32>
 <418b8140-fafb-442f-b91c-e22cc47f8adb@y22g2000pri.googlegroups.com>
 <j7i6va$nso$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <7156122c-b63f-487e-ad1b-0edcc6694a7a@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
 <ffeeb5d0-5685-42ff-a141-72bea410f239@u10g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
 <409c81ab-bd54-493b-beb4-a0cca99ec306@p27g2000prp.googlegroups.com>
 <d831c4d8-3540-44cb-8976-e588e22b4c59@l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
 <a3j4wzrhrj65$.bkkht9t97w84.dlg@40tude.net> <j7ng9f$6ob$1@munin.nbi.dk>
 <amorj8tk8wlg.mekrgyi7rob0.dlg@40tude.net> <j7pmem$su2$1@dont-email.me>
 <4d97ced2-1695-4352-926c-2070f9ccbbf1@o19g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>
 <j7rkri$9kg$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 95.153.188.78
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1319223444 6532 127.0.0.1 (21 Oct 2011 18:57:24
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 18:57:24 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=95.153.188.78;
 posting-account=niG3UgoAAAD7iQ3takWjEn_gw6D9X3ww
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKRC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:7.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/7.0,gzip(gfe)
Xref: news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:14132
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2011-10-21T11:55:41-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Oct 21, 3:25=A0pm, "J-P. Rosen" <ro...@adalog.fr> wrote:
>
> But that is exactly what Wide_Wide_String is!
>
Wide_Wide_String is just another kind of representation - UCS-4/
UTF-32.

> So you are proposing to drop Wide_Wide_String on the ground that it is
> visibly an array, and then provide a private type with a lot of (costly)
> machinery to allow it to be manipulated just as if it were an array?
>
All kinds of strings are still useful in my model (String for
ISO-8859-1, Wide_String for UCS-2 and Wide_Wide_String for UCS-4), and
they are required to represent string literals.

Internal representation of data in such private type can be optimized
for use in concrete domain; but source code which use it still be
portable.

Actually, near to nobody use Wide_Wide_String in real applications.
Why?

> Come on! That's ultra-purism that brings zero improvement in practice.
>
Its done already. ;-)