Re: Larger matrices

[Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>]

amado.alves@gmail.com schrieb:
>>> And Ada got in the way: slicing restricted to one-dimensional arrays!
>> Compared to other languages that have no slicing at all?
> 
> There are languages better than Ada at array indexing, including
> slicing. If there aren't, there should be!

Ada is a systems programming language.  As such, it is
targetting digital computers. In cases where Ada can be used
for some mathematical tasks, it is still a systems programming
language.

You could just ask for a type system that allows
assignment to diagonals of matrices, upper triangles,
switch from row order to column order right in the
type system and so on. (And, I guess, per DK, have these
type based mechanisms be construction facilities for
the programmer, with default implementations only).

Ada is about computers that have word/byte adressable
storage cells that happen to be able to store
bit combinations. Ada is not about cells of mathematical
abstractions.  Overlap is accidental.


If you do already have some theory for your graphs,
and presuming you need a working program for large
matrices, I'd suggest that you seriously consider prototyping
your algorithms using one of the fine PLs that do have the
required mathematical stuff built in.   (The various APLs, some
of which are specializing or certain large data sets, come
to mind; Mathematica, and so on.)  You can always concentrate
on an specially efficient Ada implementation later.

Ada is a systems programming language for digital computer
systems performing close-to-the-hardware tasks, not
mathematics.


--
Georg Bauhaus
Y A Time Drain  http://www.9toX.de