Re: How can I avoid Using a Semaphore?

[Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>]

In article <0Cka6.290338$U46.9207275@news1.sttls1.wa.home.com>,
  "DuckE" <nospam_steved94@home.com> wrote:
> In my opinion this is one of the weak points of Ada 95.  It
> would have been better to not have the 'input and 'output
> pre-defined for built in types (as a part of the language)
> but to include a package for defining these
> attributes.  That way an arbitrary representation of built in
> types could be used with streams when desired.


I don't see your point here. Surely you are not arguing in
favor of REQUIRING people to define their own stream attributes
for types, that would be a huge pain for the most common use
of stream attributes.

There are two possibilities

1. You want to control stream behavior on a type by type basis.
This you can do perfectly fine, by just avoiding built in types
like Integer, which is good practice anyway, and then define
the stream attributes to work however you want.

2. You want to control stream attributes globally (as is
permitted in GNAT by replacing the System.Stream_Attributes
unit), but you seem to say in the same message that you do NOT
like the fact that in GNAT this approach results in the default
routines applying to everything.

It really seems like Ada 95 does EXACTLY the right think in the
terms you have layed out here, you will have to be a lot
clearer in making your acase that something is missing. Perhaps
you can give at least a sketch of what you would like to see.

From where I sit, it seems like your problem is reasonable,
and easily addressed with the current language features, and
i can't see any addition to these features which would be
helpful in this particular case.


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/