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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.99.49.150 with SMTP id x144mr9310522pgx.68.1505222716984;
        Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.36.95.213 with SMTP id r204mr754116itb.10.1505222716911;
 Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!127no326311itw.0!news-out.google.com!p6ni990itp.0!nntp.google.com!127no326310itw.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <op8mio$1scc$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=193.71.175.207;
 posting-account=uulyKwoAAAA86DO0ODu--rZtbje8Sytn
NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.71.175.207
References: <oludae$seh$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
 <915874b5-52c0-4aa8-9023-82fddedb816f@googlegroups.com>
 <op6odj$elu$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <d5f3c820-1e9c-4a7d-9e2b-1981647180e5@googlegroups.com>
 <e3074266-6ebc-4eab-b0de-7fc1a4b5c7c4@googlegroups.com>
 <67345f73-530c-400b-9eb4-63eeb440154c@googlegroups.com>
 <b21832af-972a-4746-b9b1-9ea4a48bd196@googlegroups.com>
 <op868s$s5i$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <9a6338d9-83be-4e45-b8b7-edc56e33537f@googlegroups.com>
 <op8cgh$183k$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <2deb28e2-f7e8-4461-b8b8-c2c6cf2784aa@googlegroups.com>
 <op8iqd$1kg9$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 <5de470d2-aa3d-4c02-ae2b-266c33a289fe@googlegroups.com>
 <op8mio$1scc$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5126ef7a-3324-4e44-b110-5e4838189f5f@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Community Input for the Maintenance and Revision of the Ada
 Programming Language
From: Egil H H <ehh.public@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 13:25:16 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Body-CRC: 212348264
X-Received-Bytes: 3372
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:48055
Date: 2017-09-12T06:25:16-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 3:14:04 PM UTC+2, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
> How? What is the difference between giving the bound in a generic 
> instantiation vs in a type declaration?
> 

With a generic, a user can decide the absolute maximum for his/her application, so the discriminated record does not need to have an upper bound of Natural'Last, reducing the memory footprint.


> >> As I said there is almost no use for bounded-length strings.
> > 
> > You may not have need for it. That doesn't necessarily make it true
> > for the rest of the world.
> I didn't say that. I said that there is no use case for it. Which is not 
> same. Regarding the rest of the world, it is even simpler. It is a mere 
> empirical fact relatively easy to measure. Take available Ada code base 
> and compare how frequently various types of strings are used there.
> 
> That nobody actually uses bounded strings does not necessary mean that 
> there is no use of bounded strings. Maybe people are uneducated, have 
> prejudices etc. But no the thing is indeed useless, therefore not used. 
> Could be quietly removed from the standard, nobody would notice...

Well, this is clearly _your_ opinion, nothing more. You don't have access to all Ada code bases out there. If you do, there are several intelligence agencies out there that would like a word with you.
_You_ can't find a use case, others can, and have. Maybe you're in the "have prejudices" category...

Get off your high horse, for a change.