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: 103376,8eff44ec1bcf8433 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-16 08:35:30 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!easynews!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!iad-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Vincent Marciante" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <9qctpn$lil$1@news.huji.ac.il> <3BCC1BEE.99169F8B@free.fr> <9qhcj0$anv$1@news.huji.ac.il> Subject: Re: Container reqs X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Message-ID: <4tYy7.9380$ym4.408459@iad-read.news.verio.net> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 11:36:31 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 160.79.20.98 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 1003246528 160.79.20.98 (Tue, 16 Oct 2001 15:35:28 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 15:35:28 GMT Organization: Verio Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14699 Date: 2001-10-16T11:36:31-04:00 List-Id: The Original Booch Components available at AdaPower (along with the newer Ada95 version) seem to me to meet most of these requirements. What is the main objection to the original ones? Vincent Marciante "Ehud Lamm" wrote in message news:9qhcj0$anv$1@news.huji.ac.il... > Jean-Marc Bourguet wrote in message > news:3BCC1BEE.99169F8B@free.fr... > > * the library should have an organisation which make it extensible; > > Ok. > > > > > * for one ADT, it should be possible to choose between several > > implementations (say an hash table or a red black tree for the > > ADT dictionnary); > > Ok. Crucial. > > > > > * if several ADT are using the same implementation (say a stack and a > > queue provided over singly linked lists), it should be possible to > > share the implementation package; > > Ok. > > > > > * the container types should be limited (one can always provides > > a clone function if needed). > > Right. > > > > > * the contained types should not be limited (one can always provides > > a standard wrapper for limited types) > > > > I also like this design. But others seem to disagree (maps of maps of maps > of ...), and I understand their pov. We should try to find the best > solution/compromise on this important issue. > > Ehud > >