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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,8eff44ec1bcf8433 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-16 12:25:05 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Container reqs Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 15:18:07 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9qi15g$gal$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <9qctpn$lil$1@news.huji.ac.il> <9qevpn$8k$1@nh.pace.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1003259888 16725 136.170.200.133 (16 Oct 2001 19:18:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Oct 2001 19:18:08 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14735 Date: 2001-10-16T19:18:08+00:00 List-Id: "Stephen Leake" wrote in message news:ug08jtoa9.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov... > "Marin David Condic" writes: > > For example: Why not produce a set of packages that supports a) a > > homogeneous bi-directional list and b) a homogeneous map? I'll concede to > > the need for a static & dynamic version of each. That would be what gets > > called in the technical papers "A Good Start"(tm). > > I agree. My set of components does not currently provide a "homogenous > map". At least, I don't think it does - I'm not sure you define that > the same way I do. > By a "homogenous map" I mean something that roughly approximates an indexed file. (See the MFC for what they call a "Map") Basically, there is a need for some kind of in-memory data structure that might hold, for example, employee names as a string associated to employee records such that retrieval out of the map is based on the employee name. Homogeneous in the sense that the bulk of standard issue applications for a Map need not hold some kind of heterogenous data based on some "root object". No need to have pointers to some 'class - although that might be "Nice To Have"(tm). (I'd avoid making it a requirement - but if you support it, cool!) > So, how about you download my components, add a homogeneous map, and > then somebody else can add what they want. > > I know, someone will chime in with "Why start with Stephe's instead of > the Booch Components?". Well, that is exactly the question we need to > be discussing now. > I'm willing to start from anywhere provided there is some modicum of concensus that "anywhere" is the right thing to adopt. (I didn't much like the Ada.Strings... packages because they weren't what I would have built, but I dropped my own string tools when the basic services were available in a standard package. Better to be in-sync and consistent even if it isn't what I might view as the ultimate answer.) As for consensus, I reiterate that the key players will be one or more of the compiler vendors. If you're willing to have your components distributed by the vendors and they're willing to accept/distribute some version of them, I'd get behind it and be willing to help out. If you really want to get your stuff adopted as the "standard" you might consider trying to enlist a vendor or two. This is one of those "Time To Market" thingies wherein the first guy to get adopted and out there wins the debate. What everyone else thinks won't matter so long as your code is at minimum "sufficient". > Several people have put together what they consider "A Good Start". > The question is, is there enough consensus for any one of these to > convince the rest of us to jump on board, and integrate our stuff into > it (instead of the other way around). > I don't think you'll ever get a consensus debating it here. Get a vendor to back it and it will likely win. I think it was Charles Colson of the Nixon Whitehouse who once said "When you've got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow..." Whatever gets distributed widely and integrated into a number of projects will end up becoming too hard to resist. > > Perhaps you could vote on the several that are out there, indicating > which one most closely fits _your_ needs. Then everyone else could do > the same. Some data would be useful here. > My preferences aren't that strong provided there is some minimal, simple way to get a handful of the most commonly used structures. (That, and having it under a license that isn't infectious.) Mostly, I want to use whatever is going to have some acceptance by the vendors. MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/