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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c6150ba97747373e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-17 02:58:54 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!130.133.1.3!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!dialin-145-254-041-111.arcor-ip.NET!not-for-mail From: Dmitry A.Kazakov Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: RE: runtine instanciation Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 00:04:10 +0200 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-145-254-041-111.arcor-ip.net (145.254.41.111) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1024307932 7687259 145.254.41.111 (16 [77047]) User-Agent: KNode/0.4 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26132 Date: 2002-06-18T00:04:10+02:00 List-Id: Robert C. Leif wrote: > From: Bob Leif > To: Dmitry Kazakov et al. > I suspect that in many cases there is a very straightforward approach to > accomplish the equivalent of runtime instantiation. In my own work on > the creation of a new bioinformatics standard, CytometryML, I have a > requirement to create an array of records, which can have up to 15 > fields. Each of the data types for the fields (parameters) will be > represented by a compiled package with a complete set of specific > operations. However, the user (customer) at runtime will have the > prerogative of selecting from 1 to 15 of these parameters to include in > the record. Fortunately, this is directly analogous to the creation of > the data type in a database. It does NOT have to occur instantaneously. > Conceivably, the user could wait about a minute for this to occur. I > would like to be able to compile and link the instantiation of the > record and the array. Parenthetically, I am quite willing, if need be, > to precompile 15 generic packages of records, which have from one to > fifteen fields and instantiate only one of them. The 15 generic records > perhaps could also be included in one package. > > Another similar problem, is to create a calculation program in Ada that > is very general for evaluating a mathematical expression. If the > expression can be converted to an Ada function, why not just compile it? > > I believe Rational and DEC had incremental compilers. Could this > facility be made available, even in a space inefficient form, in one of > the Ada 95 compilers? This approach has a significant potential > commercial benefit for the vendors. It would require a runtime version > of their compilers, which could be licensed for a fee to be ultimately > paid by the end users of the program. > > Before any of the real-time enthusiasts become upset by this proposal, > please remember, that this is not to be applied to the run-time > operations of mission critical applications where execution time and > scheduling are important. Well, if performance is not an issue, why not to use class-wide objects instead of genericity? Doing so you would not need to instantiate anything. In fact no automatic instantiation would help if the types are unknown in advance. A brute force, like an integrated compiler might help, but I think it would be better to advance ADT to solve problems like that. [ Those who disagree may just switch to SmallTalk. (:-)) ] -- Regards, Dmitry Kazakov www.dmitry-kazakov.de