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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,e6c9800e35ccfeee X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: tarjeij@ulrik.uio.no (Tarjei Jensen) Subject: Re: GNAT: Performance of String functions Date: 1997/07/23 Message-ID: <5r5cfh$irn$1@ratatosk.uio.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 258406432 References: <5r1l6e$e0h$1@ratatosk.uio.no> <1997Jul22.071638.1@eisner> <33D4F30F.5299@online.no> Organization: University of Oslo, Norway Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-07-23T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >Robert Dewar writes: > You are still making unwarranted assumptions about the data structure > used for bounded strings. If the data structure is what you call a > "counted > " string, then no special cleverness is required on the compiler's part. As you have supplied no name of any existing compiler that implements bounded strings any other way than GNAT does it, the I assume that my assumption is warranted. I'd be delighted if it is possible to write a portable bounded string package that does not copy blindly on assignment. So far everything I have seen leads me to believe that this is not possible. Perhaps if bounded strings were implemented with pointers to the actual strings, but that may just complicate matters. Greetings, -- // Tarjei T. Jensen // tarjeij@ulrik.uio.no || fax +47 51 85 87 01 || voice +47 51 85 87 39 // Support you local rescue centre: GET LOST! // Working, but not speaking for the Norwegian Hydrographic Service.