Re: array of strings in a function

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

Jeffrey Carter wrote:

 > So a negative Length is possible? And Contents (P, -27) is
 > meaningful? I think Length should return Natural, and Row should be
 > Positive.

I'll buy that.  The functions I supplied would raise Constraint_Error
for a negative Row value.  But not allowing a negative value is probably
better.

 >> type Parameter_List is String;
 >
 >
 > This is not Ada. And making it "new String" won't work, either, since
 >  Parameter_List is definite. So this proposal needs some work.
 > Perhaps "new Unbounded_String" is better.

Oops!  SUBtype Parameter_List is String;

Or you can do "type Parameter_List is new String;"  but that requires
writing a lot of type conversions.

 > Something along these lines could work, perhaps using
 > Unbounded_String, but I wanted to point out to to the OP that this
 > won't work as given, and needs some work.

Right, I didn't compile and test it, since I was just describing one way
to approach the actual implementation.  As I said, if I were doing it 
"for real" that way, I would probably use Reserved_128 or some such as a 
  marker.

-- 
                                        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