Re: ARG asks Ada Community for API Proposals.

[Dale Stanbrough <dstanbro@bigpond.net.au>]

Ted Dennison wrote:

> A damn good point. We have already discovered during the process of 
> defining the Grace container packages that lack of default values for 
> generic instantiations causes us to have to throw out a lot of features, 
> lest we run afoul of our instantiation simplicity requirements.
> 
> It would be a damn shame to end up with something like that in the 
> standard, along with the new features that make the trade-offs unnessecary.
> 
> However, I do think a lot of stuff that we didn't put in due to lack of 
> default generic parameter could be added at a later date without huge 
> structural changes. Presumably there will be a webpage somewhere where 
> folks can go to keep themselves abrest of the latest proposed language 
> changes.

Perhaps we should have a package structure that includes versioning
information...

   e.g.

      package Ada95 is end;
      package Ada95.Containers is...

      package Ada05 is end;
      package Ada05.Containers is...

to allow for different language features. This would allow for
upgrades in the future while not requiring existing code to be 
modified.

Do we have access to the list of features that have been proposed
for Ada0Y?

Dale