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,a315126e5fc76ced
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-03-22 01:04:28 PST
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Path: 
 nntp.gmd.de!dearn!blekul11!ccsdec1.ufsia.ac.be!reks.uia.ac.be!idefix.CS.kuleuven.ac.be!
 Belgium.EU.net!EU.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!gatech!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!paperboy.wellfleet.com!noc.near.net!inmet!henning!stt
From: stt@henning.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft)
Subject: Re: Simplifying Unbounded_Stri
Message-ID: <D5ttJK.K8E@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
Sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com
Organization: Intermetrics, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
References: <3khc1s$2bt@dmsoproto.ida.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 1995 05:21:20 GMT
Date: 1995-03-22T05:21:20+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

David Wheeler (wheeler@ida.org) wrote:

: I'm looking for some advice on how to simplify Unbounded_String
: handling. Discussion and source code follows.
..

I would recommend the following:

   with Ada.Strings.Unbounded;
   use Ada.Strings.Unbounded;
   package Unbounded_Converters is
       function "+"(From : String) return Unbounded_String renames
          To_Unbounded_String;
       function "+"(From : Unbounded_String) return String renames
          To_String;
   end Unbounded_Converters;

And then a user of unbounded strings can:
   with Ada.Strings.Unbounded; use Ada.Strings.Unbounded;
   with Unbounded_Converters; use Unbounded_Converters;

Now they have a convenient unary operator "+" for converting back
and forth between unbounded strings and strings, meaning that there
is no particular reason to create separate routines for unbounded
string output.  You might still want a version of Get_Line which
didn't bother to go through String, so you might want to add this
to your package.

I don't see the need to define a child package, and as you mention,
implementations are allowed to limit the creation of child packages
of implementation-provided packages (though I doubt that many will
impose such limitations).

-Tucker Taft  stt@inmet.com
Intermetrics, Inc.