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,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c63aa81a67eceb8f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Ragged Array Proposal
Date: 1999/09/25
Message-ID: <7sij2e$suf$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 529389085
References: <37e7c08e@eeyore.callnetuk.com> <7satei$e2q$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <m3vh922o3u.fsf@vault80.infomatch.bc.ca> <37EA4E91.1D4D1FC@averstar.com>
 <37eaa24b@eeyore.callnetuk.com> <7sgbke$ci5$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <37EBD2F3.E1E32672@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x40.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat Sep 25 13:35:10 1999 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-09-25T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <37EBD2F3.E1E32672@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com>,
  Wes Groleau <wwgrol@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com> wrote:
> In the cases of gdb and Apex Duo, where the same debugger
understands
> both C and Ada, then the debugger should be able to understand
>
>    char *fruits[] = { "apple", "orange", "pear" };
>
> So how much work would it be to handle an Ada syntax that has
the
> same underlying implementation?

Quite a bit, the storage structure you are proposing for your
ragged arrays is quite different from the structure implied
by the above C structure. Just because it looks a bit similar
to the human eye at the source level is quite irrelevant. You
would need a way of marking the Ada structure (tricky using
standard debugging formats, because there is no analogous
C format at the storage level), and circuitry in the debugger
for interpreting this structure.

I guess you should add a world class debugger to the list of
things you planning to knock off in your spare time one day :-)

> The loudest complaints I hear from C-sick folks (who've seen
Ada 83
> but never heard of Ada.Strings.* or Interfaces.C) concerns
Ada's
> alleged lack of string capabilities.

Anyone can complain about anything, especially when the
complaint is based on willful ignorance (willful here because
any C programmer who wants to find out about the string
capabilities in Ada, which are far more powerful than those
in C of course, can easily do so!)




Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.