Re: integer'image

[mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman)]

In article <10140@as0c.sei.cmu.edu> ae@sei.cmu.edu (Arthur Evans) writes:

>An Ada 9X Revision Request asking to eliminate this space was rejected
>by the Requirements Team.  I don't speak for the Team.  However, I've
>always assumed that the space was for symmetry with negative numbers.
>That is, +N and -N always have a 'image of the same width.
This is utter nonsense. Why not give me a width parameter such as I have in
Integer_IO already? I've always envisioned the 'image and 'value attributes
as, inter alia, a baseline of operations with which to WRITE I/O routines,
equivalent to the atoi and itoa calls in the C library. I realize you don't
speak for the team, so this flame is not aimed at you, but flame it is.

If I can't get a flush-left string out of 'image, it's virtually useless.
And if 'image and 'value aren't symmetric, why not? 'value reads past
whitespace; why should 'image give me gratuitous whitespace? Look at C.
Let me do my own padding, guys. The nonuniformity in attributes is
utterly maddening in Ada. I'll give more examples sometime.
>
>Yes, getting rid of that space is a bother.  Better is to instantiate
>Integer_IO.
Yeah, right. So what good is 'image? Any comments from Team members?

Mike Feldman