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,c3a7c1845ec5caf9
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Equality operator overloading in ADA 83
Date: 1997/04/26
Message-ID: <dewar.862096820@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 237610223
References: <01bc4e9b$ac0e7fa0$72041dc2@lightning>
 <335CAEFE.35DC@elca-matrix.ch>
 <mheaney-ya023680002204972052190001@news.ni.net>
 <335E0A26.16D0@elca-matrix.ch> <E93v9n.FDH@world.std.com>
 <33692089.5794807@news.airmail.net>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-26T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Kevin Cline said

<<>I mean, to append a single character to this array, I just want to
>increment the discrim, and stick the character in the array.  But Ada
>rules require me to do an assignment on the whole thing.

Another outstanding reason why Ada never became popular for desktop
applications.  String manipulation with the Ada standard string types is a
major pain in the butt, and amazingly inefficient.>>

That seems completely specious reasoning. Just because one approach that
one might use for string manipulation is not permitted for very good 
reasons do not mean that "string manipulation with the Ada standard
string types is a major pain in the butt", or that it is "amazingly
inefficient". It is perfectly possible to write convenient, efficient
string processing code in Ada, and many people have done it.