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: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-30 07:58:01 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!wn14feed!wn13feed!wn11feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Mark A. Biggar" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? References: <1064527575.648809@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3F739C1D.4030907@attbi.com> <3F78E850.8010401@comcast.net> <3F797748.3000203@noplace.com> In-Reply-To: <3F797748.3000203@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.235.88.213 X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net X-Trace: rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net 1064933880 12.235.88.213 (Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:58:00 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:58:00 GMT Organization: Comcast Online Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 14:58:00 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:18 Date: 2003-09-30T14:58:00+00:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > I'm not even sure why Bounded_String exists - except for intellectual > completeness. Yes, I can see where in some cases I might want the > flexibility of Unbounded_String with the determinism of String. However, > in practice, I use either String or Unbounded_String. I don't even think > I ever took the shrink-wrap off of Bounded_String. If I really needed > it, I could create it on my own rather easily. But I've never needed it. > > I suppose it would not hurt too much to make a Bounded_String version. > More for completeness than anything else. (It would look kind of silly > to be able to do a Get_Line or Put_Line of String or Unbounded_String > but not Bounded_String, right?) But I'd be curious to know if there is > *anybody* out there using Bounded_String on a regular basis. (Maybe it > should be depricated?) > > There's another reason for having a conventional library outside of the > ARM - we could have experimented with the three string packages and > discovered if there was much interest in a Bounded_String before > committing it to permanent existence as part of the standard. Bounded string is suppose to be for those cases where you need strings that vary in length but also don't want to or can't support heap allocation of string buffers (embedded, etc.). It's a small but necessary nitch. -- mark@biggar.org mark.a.biggar@comcast.net