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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,6c424a2d310d290 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria.organon.com (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Ada Generic Library (very) preliminary release Date: 1997/07/14 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 256819054 Distribution: world References: <33C39534.E8DAC63D@elca-matrix.ch> Organization: PSINet Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-07-14T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article Brian Rogoff writes: > STL is based on an analysis of the underlying structure of many algorithms, > and is more rooted in algebraic specification than in BS-oriented, er, > object-oriented programming. :-) ;^) I hear ya! > > It would be true, however, that if Root_Stack derived (either publicly or > > privately) from Finalization.Controlled, then there would be a small > > penalty to call Initialize, Finalize, and Adjust, a penalty that need not > > be incured by bounded forms (ie, implemented as an array). > > How small is this "small penalty"? I guess what you and I should do is > measure the overhead of the suggested approaches, if efficiency were the > overriding concern (it isn't, but I'm still intrereseted). IME, your instincts here Brian are quite right. For something like the STL level of "componentry", this is _not_ a "small overhead", given any half reasonable definition of "small". /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari