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 12:45:03 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 15:38:47 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9qi2c8$gpb$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <9qctpn$lil$1@news.huji.ac.il> <3BCC01B1.18C18C98@free.fr> <3BCC6CB7.20BAA30D@boeing.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1003261128 17195 136.170.200.133 (16 Oct 2001 19:38:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Oct 2001 19:38:48 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:14741 Date: 2001-10-16T19:38:48+00:00 List-Id: A wise proposition. If you wish to keep the realtime/embedded crowd happy, you need to have task-safe versions. You also need to have static allocation versions. Nice To Have are versions that may do dynamic allocation, but don't impose that for read access so you can load them up at startup and be sure they won't kill you after that. For non-realtime/embedded, non-multitasking, plain vanilla applications you can have non-task-safe and dynamic implementations. That leaves us with four versions of any given structure. Any other variants? Like Object Oriented versus Generic Instantiated implementations? That would mean 8 variants of every structure. (Starts making it harder to find or make a library that fits.) If you presume a need for Lists and Maps, that means 8 packages that need to be implemented to constitute A Good Start. If those already exist and some consensus emerges to adopt some existing thing, great. If not, 8 packages could probably be built from nothing in a reasonable time. Is it possible that we could have a consensus that what I have outlined here might work for a *minimal* set of requirements? We can presume that fancy-schmancy optional data structrues are allowed to exist or be implemented - they just need not be *required* for adoption criteria. I think getting just this far would mean that there is a usable component library that probably exceeds the capabilities of things available as "standard" for other languages. (IOW, If compilers shipped with *just*this*much*more* they are likely exceeding what compilers for other languages give you for data structures.) We could argue about what else to add to it *after* this much got adopted. :-) 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/ "Stephen Leake" wrote in message news:u3d4jtnq6.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov... > No conflict here, just different experience. Apparently, the library > should have both task safe and non-task safe components, as the Booch > library has (and my library does not; my experience matches > Jean-Marc's, so far). > > We hope to get the union of all useful components, not the > intersection of components _everyone_ finds useful, which would be the > null set.