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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,842accb6a7d76669
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-13 21:05:15 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ppp-1-18.cvx1.telinco.NET!not-for-mail
From: "Nick Roberts" <nickroberts@adaos.worldonline.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: List container strawman 1.1
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 04:01:06 -0000
Message-ID: <9ssu28$150jnq$2@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de>
References: <mailman.1005002950.9554.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <9s941i$11mrei$3@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> <u1yjbers0.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>
 <9s9nkr$11se3h$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> <u668mcr80.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>
 <3BEC9BB8.6010708@telepath.com> <3BEC9F87.DBED743D@san.rr.com>
 <u3d3ihb38.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov> <3BF1567C.89167E12@san.rr.com>
 <svfI7.23405$xS6.37107@www.newsranger.com>
 <B8171B48.5D00%benjaminplace@NOSPAM.sprintmail.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-1-18.cvx1.telinco.net (212.1.136.18)
X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1005714313 38817530 212.1.136.18 (16 [25716])
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16482
Date: 2001-11-14T04:01:06+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

There is another possibility that some people may like. My proposal includes
overloadings of the "*" function to provide replication. So instead of:

   Cuddly_Marsupials := Singleton("Koala");

one could write:

   Cuddly_Marsupials := 1*"Koala";

The problem with this replication form is that, in the case of string
elements, it could lead to ambiguities if a type from Ada.Strings.* is
visible, and in the case of integer elements it would certainly lead to
ambiguities.

I have suggested other names. How about:

   Cuddly_Marsupials := Only("Koala");

?

--
Best wishes,
Nick Roberts



"Ben Place" <benjaminplace@NOSPAM.sprintmail.com> wrote in message
news:B8171B48.5D00%benjaminplace@NOSPAM.sprintmail.com...
> Ted Dennison at dennison@telepath.com wrote on 11/13/01 3:36 PM:
>
> > I suppose we could just create a null list and make everyone "&" to
that, just
> > to stop the bickering. :-)
>
> Why not overload a "Create" function so that it takes either no arguments,
a
> single element, or a list.
>
> This would return a null list, a list with a single element in it, or a
copy
> of the list passed in, respectively.
>
> And can I vote for calling it "Create" while I'm here not lurking?
>
> Thanks,
> Ben Place
>