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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,cc4f25d878383cc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-11 07:05:45 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cambridge1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3C1620C3.1C7440DD@sparc01.ftw.rsc.raytheon.com> From: Wes Groleau Reply-To: wwgrol@sparc01.ftw.rsc.raytheon.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,es-MX,es,pt,fr-CA,fr MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Dimensionality Checking (Ada 20XX) References: <11bf7180.0112070815.2625851b@posting.google.com> <9v0crt$bo2bi$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> <9v37rs$cdmva$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:05:39 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.168.144.162 X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com X-Trace: bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com 1008083144 151.168.144.162 (Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:05:44 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:05:44 EST Organization: Raytheon Company Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17753 Date: 2001-12-11T10:05:39-05:00 List-Id: > It's easier to demonstrate than to actually explain. Show me a piece of > (genuine) Ada code that uses a floating point type to hold values that would > be usefully made unit-specific, and I'll show you how they certainly could, > and probably should, be held by a fixed point type instead. Five million lines of AN/BSY-2 submarine control system ? > I'm not actually trying to argue that floating point types should never be > used for non-unitless quantities. All I'm suggesting is that there is no > practical need to add the unit-specific facility to floating point types. > Furthermore, I think it would be horribly painful trying to do so (consider > Ada.Numerics). Ada was less than five years old when BSY-2 started, so there were undoubtedly Ada features underused. (There certainly were Ada features OVERused.) So likely some of the floating-point should have been fixed point. But don't forget the principal of orthogonality. One feature shouldn't be artificially tied to another. If one numeric type allows units, all should. -- Wes Groleau http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau