From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 12 Aug 93 15:18:18 GMT
From: eachus@mitre-bedford.arpa  (Robert I. Eachus)
Subject: Re: question about generics
Message-ID: <EACHUS.93Aug12101818@spectre.mitre.org>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

      If you want to create a (ragged) array of strings, you need to
have different discriminant values.  But the rule in 3.7.2(8) says
that the default discriminant is used if there is no constraint in the
subtype indication for the array component, so all components of an
array have the same constraints.  (There is a note at 3.6.1(16)
pointing this out, but it really should be in 3.6...)  In any case by
having a nesting of record types, the discriminant (of the record
inside) of each array component can be different.

      An alternate approach is to have a record containing a current
size and a string.  The disadvantage is that now equality for objects
of the type doesn't work right unless you explicitly set the "unused"
bytes to a specific value.  I prefer the first approach as there is no
distributed cost.


--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...