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, LOTS_OF_MONEY 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: 2001-10-23 15:22:12 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!psiuk-p3!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, 23 Oct 2001 17:18:31 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9r4mr9$os0$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <9qctpn$lil$1@news.huji.ac.il> <3BCA86C7.BB252751@acm.org> <%jYy7.31350$ev2.37672@www.newsranger.com> <3BCD7C50.647ADBD0@brighton.ac.uk> <9qk44b$utk$1@news.huji.ac.il> <3BD527A8.93C1F68B@brighton.ac.uk> <9r3umu$hvo$1@news.huji.ac.il> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1003871913 25472 136.170.200.133 (23 Oct 2001 21:18:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Oct 2001 21:18:33 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:15106 Date: 2001-10-23T21:18:33+00:00 List-Id: I've been hoping to find in this discussion some kind of "Least Common Denominator" that would outline requirements for some minimal collection of data structures & algorithms for a standard library. Slicing the scope down to some minimal set of containers that might address - say - 80%? of the garden variety usages would constitute A Good Start. (Personally, I think a plain vanilla double ended list and map would take care of the bulk of needs.) It can *always* get expanded into different variations and flavors - not unlike what you see under Ada.Strings. Getting overly ambitious about what should be required for a standard Ada library is just going to guarantee that this discussion remains just a discussion. If you had: generic type Item is private ; package Lists is ..... and... generic type Index is private ; type Item is private ; with function "<" (Left, Right : Index) return Boolean is <> ; package Maps is..... would this *maybe* take care of some really large percentage of the usages of data structures? Yeah, it wouldn't necessarily handle all the more interesting cases and it might not be task safe and it might not be useful for realtime and a whole bunch of other objections. But for a *whole lot* of uses, this might just be enough and it leaves plenty of room for things like "package Realtime_Lists is" and "package Object_Oriented_Maps is" and so on. If it isn't kept reasonably simple, it won't get done and/or it won't find widespread acceptance. I'm thinking that a tree containing just the two packages I outlined above (or some reasonable variant on that theme) might just be simple enough, reliable enough and useful enough to make a start. If that much got accepted, other variations could be added with time. And we still don't know if any vendors would include it in their distributions... 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/ "Ted Dennison" wrote in message news:IKkB7.40160$ev2.47839@www.newsranger.com... > > Yes, but now we are talking about having multiple different libraries. That is > the exact situation we have now that everyone is decrying. > .