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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f2690a5e963b61b6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!news.arcor.de!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: GCC 4.0 Ada.Containers Cursor danger.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.14.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <1120474891.635131.216700@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <1120575076.876798.108220@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <1120583470.429264.325450@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <osoo6gccqpnm.2o5eehhafwb1.dlg@40tude.net>
 <42cb8d21$0$22761$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
 <ldco4pwrxop4$.1py0a7isiagea.dlg@40tude.net>
 <z--dnRI60_7j_lHfRVn-qw@megapath.net>
 <tyi72ga8ch55$.3tea03tbwrtx.dlg@40tude.net>
 <42cd064c$0$10817$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
 <k62rlp2n1ls3.1cnwufmnuit7v.dlg@40tude.net>
 <42cda8c4$0$22780$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
 <1u3hh2597i4ne$.1ryetugksbmus.dlg@40tude.net>
 <42ce5856$0$22762$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>
 <1o398w3zo2zf1$.f1f7tukylueo$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <CpednSZYNbLOHk3fRVn-jQ@megapath.net>
 <nmv39ipirsbg$.1or742g96p5km.dlg@40tude.net>
 <42d250da$0$18021$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:18:35 +0200
Message-ID: <1vw0rnx2kbjd1.1s1tkdmfj0bos$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Jul 2005 14:18:31 MEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: d213af94.newsread4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=`HRKNU7af=mci]h2U0KHce:ejgIfPPlddjW\KbG]kaMhAV6U:Z=fE=oQL?WD4UDj:`[6LHn;2LCVn7enW;^6ZC`d<=9bOTW=MNn
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11994
Date: 2005-07-11T14:18:31+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 12:58:34 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
>> An unspecified order is still an order. What could be said about that
>> unspecified order? May the order vary for a constant container?
> 
> Unspecified order can be thought of as an advantage, too.
> You don't have to worry about the concrete actual order generated
> by one iteration.

It must be defined. A concrete actual order, how long will it stay? Can it
change during one iteration? Would you worry if the order randomly changed
each 0.1 ns?

> The requirements are more flexible.

The most flexible requirement is an absent one...

> If you need order, why not just use a container that has a specified
> order?

Exactly. From which immediately follows that the compiler should not allow
me to use an unordered container as if it were ordered.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de