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,f51e93dacd9c7fca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-18 12:54:10 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!iad-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!iad-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!bpr.best.vwh.net!bpr Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: Brian Rogoff Subject: Re: status of Ada STL? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <3d0ce154_5@news.bluewin.ch> <3D0D4274.6C5E02F9@acm.org> <4519e058.0206170753.599fd771@posting.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 19:54:07 +0000 NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.220.65.223 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 1024429812 192.220.65.223 (Tue, 18 Jun 2002 19:50:12 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 19:50:12 GMT Organization: Verio Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26297 Date: 2002-06-18T19:54:07+00:00 List-Id: On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Robert A Duff wrote: > Brian Rogoff writes: > > > While I agree, the chances for such a change in Ada are infinitesimal. > > Better to complain about things that may actually get fixed, like > > downward funargs, or a more powerful (C++ like ;) exception system. > > I think it's fun to argue about the way it ought to be, > even if there is zero chance of fixing it. I didn't say zero, I said infinitesimal, as in greater than zero but less than any positive real number. Well, I guess zero is an infinitesimal too if you define infinitesimals as monad(0)... ;-) > Many changes are impossible because they would break existing code, > but are nonetheless fun to talk about. Maybe in some future > language... Of course, but it should be made clear when people are talking about which. I'm very liberal with changes I'd make in a future Ada like language, and very conservative about changes I'd want made in an existing language. A few months ago lots of people here felt the need to get annoyed by another attempt at a safe C called Cyclone, but I think that Cyclone is worthy of study, since it has some features contemplated for the next generation of Ada (region based memory management, at least if I understood Tucker Taft correctly) and also some features that would be great to see in a new language derived from Ada (pattern matching). http://www.research.att.com/projects/cyclone/ yes, it would have been nicer if they'd started with Ada as a base, but they're going for widespread applicability so C compatibility is an important goal. -- Brian