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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: border1.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is this expected behavior or not Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 16:36:06 +0200 Organization: cbb software GmbH Message-ID: <4hzv51v872q2$.1imijbwd7heqm$.dlg@40tude.net> References: <1u72u7h5j4jg3$.wlxmaltyzqik.dlg@40tude.net> <1gnmajx2fdjju.1bo28xwmzt1nr.dlg@40tude.net> <3gv2jwc95otm.pl2aahsh9ox8.dlg@40tude.net> <1gkxiwepaxvtt$.u3ly33rbwthf.dlg@40tude.net> <1fmcdkj58brky.bjedt0pr39cd$.dlg@40tude.net> <1bj564vat3q1j$.1s4d00rlzx4ux$.dlg@40tude.net> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: FbOMkhMtVLVmu7IwBnt1tw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 X-Original-Bytes: 2749 Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:180932 Date: 2013-04-05T16:36:06+02:00 List-Id: On Fri, 5 Apr 2013 14:45:55 +0200, Stefan.Lucks@uni-weimar.de wrote: > But what reasons would you have to actually mix > narrow, Wide_ and Wide_Wide_ Strings? What is at least one reason to distinguish them? Once answered, please name a reason to distinguish UTF-16, UTF-8, UCS-2 etc strings in assignment, comparison, concatenation. There is none. Ugly design of Unbounded_String proved that. All differences are motivated by implementation details and related to the string origin or its consumer. Semantically all strings are nothing but sequences of code points. And, again, it is already *mixed* in Ada. "abc" is overloaded String, Wide_String, Wide_Wide_String. Furthermore, very idea of new string design is to mix it even more than it was before in order to get rid of the mess of I/O package multiplying like cockroaches. The difference between Randy and me, is that he wants to scrap all operations Ada 83 strings had. Since this would be clearly incompatible with existing programs, he wants to add them as completely new types, as if we had not enough string types in the language already. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de