Re: ASCL a doomed idea?

[Jeffrey Carter <jeffrey.carter@boeing.com>]

Nick Roberts wrote:
> 
> "Jeffrey Carter" <jrcarter@acm.org> wrote in message
> news:3C13D980.748CCCDA@acm.org...
> 
> Or, rather, a string is a kind of list (do you really have a problem with
> that concept?), and what the heck is the problem with using the same
> nomenclature for both (as far as possible) to help avoid confusing the poor
> Ada programmer? This isn't an ivory tower academic exercise.

That's a different meaning of "list". You could use a list data
structure to implement a string, just as you can for a queue or stack.
And just like a queue or stack, the result has different nomenclature
than a list.

> > An iterator procedure is the only thing that is an iterator; anything
> > else called an iterator is misnamed.
> 
> According to which science? On which planet, Jeff? Are you serious?

By definition: An iterator is something that iterates. Executable code
can iterate. Types and objects cannot.

> Like a file Jeff, the architypal 'container'. You read from it, you write
> into it.

Then in list terminology, by "writing" you mean insertion. Insertion is
not advisable from an iterator.

-- 
Jeffrey Carter