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-Thread: 103376,c9d5fc258548b22a
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!194.109.133.84.MISMATCH!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!news.wiretrip.org!news2.arglkargh.de!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!news.weisnix.org!newsfeed.ision.net!newsfeed2.easynews.net!ision!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 20:20:57 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110123 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How do I write directly to a memory address?
References: 
 <67063a5b-f588-45ea-bf22-ca4ba0196ee6@l11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
 <720b7e8f-1ae2-4b3b-851e-12b08b3c99e0@r4g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
 <4d52dd97$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <9a8f406d-05ca-4bf3-8487-918d4e0dd634@o18g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
 <4d52ee47$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <e1076cab-2a7e-4762-acf4-80bf807614bf@n16g2000prc.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5306a0$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <76c123ab-7425-44d8-b26d-b2b41a9aa42b@o7g2000prn.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5310ab$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <9bff52ca-6213-41da-8fa4-3a4cdd8086d3@y36g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5315c8$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <159dca70-2103-46d7-beb2-c7754d30fe36@k15g2000prk.googlegroups.com>
 <4d53222d$0$18057$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <bc7802fb-0184-437b-b0fa-9ba0ff260c04@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
 <4d540714$0$27423$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <e491f5ad-ae17-42fd-9412-f457d32ac217@q2g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5423b9$0$27423$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
In-Reply-To: <4d5423b9$0$27423$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <4d543a9a$0$6975$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Feb 2011 20:20:58 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5a4cdff8.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=K:[a:cOh5CV1`E>oC;JXEZ4IUK<Cl32<Q4Fo<]lROoRQ8kF<OcfhCO[fLg6]L<efTTPCY\c7>ejVX:VWR@VE9UASViHT;g1DC2R
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:18200
Date: 2011-02-10T20:20:58+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2/10/11 6:40 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote:

> The C++ standard has O(�) requirements for the running time of
> its container operations and algorithms, by the way.

Not surprisingly, the Ada LRM specifies these for the container
operations, too.  Not surprisingly, since the STL containers
had come back to Ada via Scheme and C++.

It may be worthwhile considering that the C++ STL emphasizes speedy
execution (and can do more with templates than Ada can do with
genercics, maybe less if ASIS is part of the hypothetical compiler)
where Ada adds the notion of tampering with cursors/elements.

Might be interesting to see how each flavor is going to be
integrated with many-processor market pressure and more
concurrent programming.