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-Thread: 103376,f2690a5e963b61b6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.megapath.net!news.megapath.net.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:53:49 -0500 From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <1120583470.429264.325450@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <42cb8d21$0$22761$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net> <42cd064c$0$10817$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> <42cda8c4$0$22780$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net> <1u3hh2597i4ne$.1ryetugksbmus.dlg@40tude.net> <1121093807.949660.274060@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1121124248.600055.292320@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <1121137531.752285.44280@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <946e7$42d3c64d$4995421$28449@ALLTEL.NET> <1121179909.262566.192270@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <5a73f$42d40166$4995149$5993@ALLTEL.NET> <1121194262.036046.38230@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: GCC 4.0 Ada.Containers Cursor danger. Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:56:48 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4952.2800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4952.2800 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.32.209.38 X-Trace: sv3-aDcXcKB2wsO+MjP07mGBBrFTCcrqZrA9JdgW+Jfo9575gW4iRom2KURRbr1oQp3AlCFWr126mhHSsZl!Dm7fv81m7CKOAImrWcdSGgY3IeDLa0exEMEiVuD6C5qzUFCPrwKlG/Jo9945vOu1/Zp7/c+RWvKO X-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:12030 Date: 2005-07-12T15:56:48-05:00 List-Id: "MMM" wrote in message news:1121194262.036046.38230@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > I agree with you completely. The problem is that Matthew insist that > there is no need for plain > vanilla unordered set and/or plain vanilla unordered hash, they do not > even exist in computer science > and the basis of the Ada.Containers library should form Ordered_Set and > Ordered_Hash. You seem to be confused about the purpose of the Ada.Containers library. It is provide the most useful containers in the standard fashion. It's not to be complete in any way. The names and design of containers was specifically selected to make it easy to add other containers in the future, like unordered sets and maps, bounded forms, protected forms, and the like. One of the first things that we did was to discard pure unordered sets and maps to reduce the size of the library. (It's now about the maximum size that we could define.) The reason has that for virtually all needs, an ordered set or map will suffice. The performance characteristics are similar, the overhead is not significant in most applications, the operations are a superset, so they are good enough. The reverse is clearly not true (if you need ordering, it can't reasonably be simulated with an unordered set or map). Clearly, the library could have lots of other kinds of containers, but these are going to be used much less often than the ones defined. We hope that a secondary standard is created down the road for such containers; Ada.Containers just provides a foundation and vision for future work. And I hope that it focuses future work so that we have more similar components rather than a plethora of different designs. It's not going to be the perfect design for everyone (probably, in fact, no one will think it to be perfect), but as a standard, it will always be available to Ada users. Randy.