From: Jeff Carter <jrcarter@acm.org>
Subject: Re: Lower bound of result of Ada.Strings.Unbounded.Slice
Date: 2000/11/22
Date: 2000-11-22T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A1C4F45.26F41F0D@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 8vfjr1$t85$1@nnrp1.deja.com
Robert Dewar wrote:
> Always look up existing AI's before submitting a new one :-)
That would be easier if there were some way to search them without
downloading all of them.
The only AI I could find that mentioned Unbounded.Slice is 128, which
contains a comment from Keith Thompson that he disagreed with Bob Duff
saying the lower bound should be 1, and that Robert Dewar also disagreed
with Bob Duff. Perhaps I don't know how to read an AI, but I saw nothing
to indicate that this was a binding interpretation (though I hope I'm
wrong).
> The proper answer is that the slice semantics are to be
> observed (forcing a lower bound of 1 is wrong).
If that's true, can I presume that the current version of GNAT works
this way? The compiler that gave 1 as the lower bound is GNAT 3.13p/Win.
--
Jeff Carter
"Hello! Smelly English K...niggets."
Monty Python & the Holy Grail
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-11-22 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-11-21 0:00 Lower bound of result of Ada.Strings.Unbounded.Slice Jeff Carter
2000-11-22 4:59 ` Robert Dewar
2000-11-22 0:00 ` Jeff Carter [this message]
2000-11-22 0:00 ` Randy Brukardt
2000-11-23 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox