Re: Bounded String question

[Serge Robyns <serge.robyns@gmail.com>]

On Wednesday, 11 November 2015 15:32:03 UTC+1, brbar...@gmail.com  wrote:
 
> Probably the sensible approach is not to expect Ada to act like C.  I use
> Bounded_Strings constantly and just expect to do the conversion from
> Bounded_Strings to plain String (and back).  It's a bit more verbose, but
> that may just be one of the costs of strong typing.

I'm not expecting Ada to act like C.  What I'm confused about is that in one case I use To_String (any type derived from the P_String package) from the P_String package but not To_Bounded_String.  Initially I wrote all the To_Strings myself but then the compiler warned me about not defining them as overriding.  I don't mind the verbosity, otherwise I could have stayed with C, java or why not even D on the contrary, this what attracted me to Ada.

> I'd also note that P_String seems to be rather close to the type name one
> would use in C for a pointer (or an access type in Ada).  Personally, I'd
> find that confusing.

I do agree, well I use T_xyz_Access for access types. It happens that my application's name start with a 'P' and at the same time I'm instating a package but I'll change this to something more expressive.

Serge