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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c2861777d1e7d2b2
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.220.230 with SMTP id pz6mr2252559pbc.3.1342096553341;
        Thu, 12 Jul 2012 05:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 l9ni11515pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!news.astraweb.com!border6.a.newsrouter.astraweb.com!border4.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.141.40.65.MISMATCH!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 14:35:09 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Lapack Ada binding matrices/vectors issue,
 how to best to resolve?
References: <jtl6av$frs$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In-Reply-To: <jtl6av$frs$1@speranza.aioe.org>
Message-ID: <4ffec47e$0$6568$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Jul 2012 14:35:10 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 570db6be.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=IOB0T8o2TPQHigV@eW57PQMcF=Q^Z^V3X4Fo<]lROoRQ8kF<OcfhCO[<>_5CCM><;_nc\616M64>ZLh>_cHTX3j]EoBdMNod5g^
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-07-12T14:35:10+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 12.07.12 02:38, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:
> 
> What would be a good way to fix this whole issue?

First, describe the issue in terms of a sufficient
number of needs, also a sufficient number of programmers
with such needs, while remembering that Ada uses building
blocks all over the place.

Second, consider Ada a general purpose programming
language that allows addressing things in the small,
unlike Mathematica, or Octave.

Third, consider, and formalize, the characteristics
of the operators and operations, such that their innate
importance becomes apparent. For example, computing
in science extends into areas where Euclidean geometry is
almost never used, where the distance used is the abstract
city block distance (not measured in meters or feet),
where operators are from statistics, etc., but you'd still
be using arrays a lot.

Forth, should these operators allow different implementations
to be selected by the programmer to match his or her program's
need?

Fifth, if there were a library of operator definitions,
such as multiplying an array by a scalar, or a container by
a scalar, would it be enough?