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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!jbg From: jbg@sei.cmu.edu (John Goodenough) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada functions versus arrays (i.e. () vs [] ) Message-ID: <6372@fy.sei.cmu.edu> Date: 8 Mar 90 14:21:21 GMT References: <184@trwacs.UUCP> <598@software.software.org> <5619@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> <848@enea.se> Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University (Software Engineering Institute), Pgh, PA In-reply-to: sommar@enea.se's message of 6 Mar 90 19:13:21 GMT List-Id: In article Re: Ada functions versus arrays (i.e. () vs [] ) of 6 Mar 90 19:13:21 GMT sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes: >I think the main reason that Ada does not use [] for array >indexing is that symbols like () are far easier to read >than using letters like C does. Of course Ada could have >used something like (..) as Pascal permit, but it feels >clumsy. And the flexibility aspect of being able to switch >between an array and a function is not to be disregarded. All these are plausible reasons, but the real reason is appallingly mundane -- the requirements specification for Ada directed that all Ada programs be representable in a small character set, the basic_characters, and this character set does not include [ and ]. (Although the possible use of brackets was discussed at at least one design review meeting, given the character set requirement, the possibility was dismissed almost immediately.) -- John B. Goodenough Goodenough@sei.cmu.edu Software Engineering Institute 412-268-6391