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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a81d7835683dac7b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-04 04:56:29 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: maa@liacc.up.pt (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=E1rio_Amado_Alves?=) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Bases for the Design of a Standard Container Library for Ada Date: 4 Sep 2003 04:56:28 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <4a4de33a.0309040356.6706bdc4@posting.google.com> References: <4a4de33a.0309021059.53f71234@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.113.164.98 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1062676588 7859 127.0.0.1 (4 Sep 2003 11:56:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Sep 2003 11:56:28 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42138 Date: 2003-09-04T11:56:28+00:00 List-Id: "Randy Brukardt" wrote in message news:... > What's missing in this document is a discussion of what the library is > trying to accomplish. You really have to have that before you can even talk > about other requirements. > ... The document rests on the assumption that the general concept of a standard container library for Ada is well understood. But a short explicitation wouldn't hurt I guess. Make the document selfsufficient. Thanks for your text. The "body of knowledge" already contains many statements of need and high level requirements (including now your message). The work plan includes adding such statments to it. I was thinking of doing that focusedly i.e. attaching them as rationalia to each of the design decisions which are the main items of the document. This sounds like working backwards, but actually the design items were made with the requirements in mind. The requirements were not explicitly expressed in the document yet simply because lack of time I guess. The Bases body of knowledge is an informal account of the collective mind. Actually what matters is the collective mind. My hope is this mind will look at the Bases and find most of their requirements honored there. Time is an issue here because the Ada 2005 process includes really near deadlines now. Particularly, the first deadline for the standard container library proposal is the end of this monht (September 2003). That deadline has something to do with AI302, I'm not sure what and how exactly, and how exactly the Bases relate to the AI302 processwise, and in fact I'm hoping people more knowledgeable of this here on CLA will help here.