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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7ee10ec601726fbf X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-31 23:23:40 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!enews.sgi.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3BE0F8AE.3B7E5C70@home.com> From: Mark Biggar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en]C-{C-UDP; EBM-SONY1} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: why not References: <3BC5D730.DA950CC7@boeing.com> <9q4pa7$1ad$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3BC6ACC8.23EF21BC@free.fr> <3BC71F54.1FFE78FA@boeing.com> <1KGx7.26476$ev2.35117@www.newsranger.com> <3BC7AD82.2A0CCCD4@acm.org> <9qhiqr$af0$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <1nDC7.180$6S7.92255364@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com> <9rjsak$bp3$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9rmhb9$o1b$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3BDEF0FE.B55FED9E@san.rr.com> <9rmuqi$es$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3BDF1F13.4B99361C@san.rr.com> <9rnbtv$5i4$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3BE03E54.57E0E6C8@san.rr.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 07:23:39 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.250.143.171 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news1.rdc1.sfba.home.com 1004599419 24.250.143.171 (Wed, 31 Oct 2001 23:23:39 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 23:23:39 PST Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15530 Date: 2001-11-01T07:23:39+00:00 List-Id: Darren New wrote: > > Marin David Condic wrote: > > Well, we aren't exactly seeing a huge consensus here about what people want, > > right? :-) > > I think everyone is pretty much agreeing that what's needed are lists > and maps, both task safe and efficient versions. The rest is just > details. ;-) I not sure here. I thing that a list type is too low level, the actual ADT that you want is a Dequeue ADT not Double-linked List ADT. Just like we already have bounded and unbounded strings, we should have bounded and unbounded Dequeues. The fact that the later can be implemented as a Double-linked list is an implementation detail. -- Mark Biggar mark.a.biggar@home.com