Re: Standard Library Interest?

["Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@comcast.net>]

Marin David Condic wrote:

> Suppose you had a package spec called "CAL.Containers.Lists" and it
> provided a simple, basic, run-of-the-mill linked list data structure. It
> gets packaged and shipped with every Ada compiler and might be
> periodically updated to fix bugs or add a few new features. No problem.
> Its not in the ARM, so nobody is going to get their panties in a bunch
> because the changes are "non-standard". Ultimately, you're no worse off
> than if you are hooking up to the Win32api - Micro$oft issues a new
> release and something changed and you've got to potentially go fix your
> code. No big deal - its done every day.
> 
> Ten years from now when the ARM is getting revised again, ACT, Aonix,
> RR, et alia, all sit around in the smoke-filled room of the ARG
> headquarters and say, "We think that CAL.Containers.Lists needs to be
> incorporated into the standard and become "Ada.Containers.Lists"..."
> What's the problem? The ARM simply copies the spec, changes the names
> and adds a whole bunch of words that says "Ada.Containers.Lists must
> behave in this manner..." How you get it there is an implementation
> detail. Since the vendors already have CAL, they could copy & rename the
> source as needed. They could use a renames if they wanted to. It doesn't
> matter.
> 
> In the mean time, the CAL library still contains a CAL.Containers.Lists
> and the editors of CAL have to decide what to do about it. They could
> declare it to be a feature that is superceded by the ARM and discontinue
> any modifications to it - basically pointing at its counterpart and
> advising you to use that as its successor for all new development. They
> could continue to modify and extend it to see if some new features
> become desirable & perhaps impact the next ARM. They could delete it and
> tell their users to either go with an earlier version of the library or
> convert to the ARM version. Its an incredibly TBD issue and it really
> doesn't matter today what direction it goes down. The point is that A
> Solution Does Exist, so don't try to figure it out *today*.

Very good, but be aware that for Ada.Containers.Lists, the issue is not 
ten years down the road, it is probably December.  In fact, I didn't go 
to the Halifax meeting, and Randy is probably typing busily away to 
provide the minutes and update the AIs to reflect what went on at the 
meeting.  It is possible that the ARG could recommend an "official" 
Ada.Containers heirarchy as early as this December.  If not, it may 
happen at the WG9 meeting in conjunction with Ada Europe next spring.

-- 
                                        Robert I. Eachus

"Quality is the Buddha. Quality is scientific reality. Quality is the 
goal of Art. It remains to work these concepts into a practical, 
down-to-earth context, and for this there is nothing more practical or 
down-to-earth than what I have been talking about all along...the repair 
of an old motorcycle."  -- from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle 
Maintenance by Robert Pirsig