Re: Ada.Strings.Bounded

["(see below)" <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>]

On 07/04/2008 17:34, in article
Pine.LNX.4.64.0804071812200.15920@medsec1.medien.uni-weimar.de,
"stefan-lucks@see-the.signature" <stefan-lucks@see-the.signature> wrote:

>>> The only useful use for "+" in Ada is for conversions.
>> 
>> OK, so that's not much of a use.  On the other hand, the idea that "+"
>> represents the identity function is ingrained enough in me that I've
>> resisted using it for a conversion operator even though others around
>> me have been doing that.  Call it an obstinate adherence to
>> meaningless purity or whatever.  But like Randy, I would have
>> preferred adding one (maybe even two) operator symbols that would have
>> no meaning except that the user could define them, although I'm not
>> sure about "#" since that already has a use (in based numeric
>> literals).  I'd prefer something not currently used at all, like "@"
>> or "!" or tilde.  Of course, it apparently isn't going to happen
>> anyway so there's not much point arguing about which character would
>> be best.
> 
> Two natural candidates which come into my mind would be an unary '&' and
> the '%'-sign:
> 
>   '%' (percent) indicates some kind of conversion anyway (though usually
>       in postfix notation, not as a prefix, "75 %" for 75/100).

Potential problems there with string literals (see RM: J.2 Allowed
Replacements of Characters)?

-- 
Bill Findlay
<surname><forename> chez blueyonder.co.uk